On Wednesday February 1, I stood side-by-side with the farmers who had taken over Place Luxembourg and the streets adjacent to the European Parliament in Brussels. On my way, long lines of tractors with Belgian, French and Dutch plates could be seen almost a kilometre away from the square. As I drew closer to the scene, the sound of their horns and the smell of burned tires saturated my ears and nose.
Farmers’ multiple voices
- However, once I entered the square the idea that I was participating to such an event became much more nuanced and complex.
- Green and yellow banners of left-wing unions and groups, along with Belgian and Flemish flags crying out their nationalist aspirations.
- Close to the entrance, a banner cloaking the statue of English-born industrialist John Cockerill called on farmers to “Say no to despotism” and organize against environmental measures.
- From the stage, speakers urged the public and policy-makers to address retailers’ power, market concentration, cheap prices and exploited labour.
Far from a mere matter of urban landscape, understanding the complexity of the struggles that day matters for politics. If we truly want to learn from what is happening and elaborate policy responses, it is essential we acknowledge that there was not one uniform square but rather diverging visions for the future likely stemming from the same structural weaknesses.
Farmers’ doppelgangers?
- Although incompatible, both responses arose from a common sense of isolation, dissatisfaction, frustration, and realisation that society – and its economy – had failed many of us.
- Rather than confronting and identifying the common origin of our condition, we fight.
- In Place Luxembourg, I believed I could trace back the common origin of farmers’ grievances to one slogan above all: “Free Farmers!
‘Free Farmers! Stop Free Trade!’
- Hence the renaming of the Mercosur trade agreement: “cars for cow” deal.
- In agriculture, untrammelled free trade and the obsession with competitiveness have led to lower income, market concentration, dependency on powerful buyers, exploitation of nature, animals and labor, and land abandonment.
Tangible policies to overcome polarisation
- If we want to overcome the current polarisation, it is key that we adopt policies that address the root causes of the problem.
- From 2020 to 2023, I led a research-action project FASS-Food EU , which brought together farmers, consumers, workers, environmental organizations and EU policy makers to unpack and improve the EU’s agri-food system.
- The aim was to collectively reflect on the regulatory and policy obstacles prevented the bloc from enjoying food chains that are Fair, Accessible, Sustainable and Short (FASS-Food).
Revising the 2019 Unfair Trading Practices Directive could give the EU and Member States the possibility of sanctioning large commercial players that purchase food at a price that does not guarantee living wage of farmers and workers.
Via competition law, EU and national authorities can break up the trade and distribution oligopolies, while trade law can also be deployed to rethink existing trade agreements and the impact of global competitiveness on food systems both in Europe and among trading partners.
Governments initiatives can help citizens to better feed themselves. Belgium’s Sécurité sociale de l'alimentation is one such example: drawing from fiscal revenues, public administrations issue food vouchers for citizens, which can be used to purchase food that respects social and environmental standards.
Whichever solutions we opt for, we will not find them in more of the same market dynamics or in another round of technological fixes. A vast toolbox exists, but unlocking it requires that we accept that food is not just like any another global commodity, with farmers’ protests just the tip of the iceberg.
Tomaso Ferrando ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
