11.12.2024
Green-colored declaration of surrender
Dear readers,
The annual «Agricultural Report» published by the Federal Office for Agriculture (FOAG) presents itself in an optimistic light this year. The reduction of crop protection products is praised and the greening of agriculture is celebrated. But behind the green headlines lies an alarming reality. Politics seems disoriented.
The agricultural report is a retrospective. It refers to the year 2023 and therefore further glosses over the situation, as the production problems in crop farming have worsened in the current year. There is not enough bread wheat and the import quotas were increased significantly this year. The potato harvest is difficult, particularly in the organic sector, with around half of the harvest failing. There will be no more Swiss organic potatoes after Christmas. And because the onions are rotting, many farmers will give up growing them. Our «Zibelemärit» in Bern without Swiss onions? Actually unthinkable... The Swiss wine-growing year was also extremely difficult. «The 2024 crop protection year highlighted the enormous importance of careful selection and precise timing of crop protection applications. Winegrowers who missed deadlines suffered considerable yield losses. Only consistent and timely treatments could effectively reduce disease pressure and ensure a satisfactory yield.» This is according to the trade magazine «Obst + Wein». More and more crops are without effective protection. Examples include wireworms in potatoes, aphids in sugar beet, stem weevils in rapeseed, whiteflies in Brussels sprouts and the cherry vinegar fly in fruit, berries and vines. The increasing number of emergency approvals is also an indication of the crisis in crop protection: because the political recipes are not working, a back door is needed. This is not honest. The reduction of plant protection products leads to a dead end. The consequences are clear: compromises in resistance management, increasing difficulties in meeting the quality requirements of retailers and food processors, growing risks of total failure, a declining willingness to cultivate certain crops and, as a result, rising food imports.
At the same time, the government is promoting a new food pyramid: plant-based proteins such as pulses are being prioritized over animal-based proteins such as meat and fish. When it comes to carbohydrates, the focus is increasingly on wholegrain products. A wide selection of seasonal and regional fruit and vegetables is also recommended. The ideal is «5 portions a day, fresh, colorful and raw», writes the Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office (FSVO) in its newsletter. «Fruit and vegetables provide many vitamins, minerals, dietary fibers and secondary plant substances. Each variety offers a different wealth of valuable ingredients. The more varied and colorful the selection, the better for your health.» And the icing on the cake: «Do something good for the environment by shopping regionally and seasonally.»
However, the same office is in the lead for the approval of new, modern plant protection products – and this is stalling. The situation is particularly precarious in organic farming. Here, there is no alternative to the use of copper-based plant protection products against fungal diseases. Copper is a heavy metal that remains in the soil and endangers soil health in the long term. Despite all the hymns of praise, greening is not taking place in so-called organic farming. That is piquant. While other synthetic crop protection products are being banned, the federal government is turning a blind eye to the use of copper.
The Swiss Farmers' Association (SFU) is also sounding the alarm. Crop production in Switzerland is declining and the outlook is clouded. Adequate protection of crops is not guaranteed. This sums up the comments made by David Brugger, Head of the Crop Production Division at the Swiss Farmers' Union, at the 8th Federal Action Plan for Plant Protection Products conference in early October 2024. The need for effective plant protection is increasing. Climate change with increased weather extremes and new, imported harmful organisms such as the Japanese beetle or cotton bollworm lend additional urgency to the warning. The challenges for crop protection are growing. However, new approvals of crop protection products cannot keep pace with the number and impact of withdrawals. Meanwhile, the FOAG takes refuge in the «principle of hope» in the Agricultural Report 2024. Alternatives are finally needed to protect crops. However, it remains unclear what these are and where they should come from.
The agricultural report also states that in 2023, farmers did not use herbicides on 19 percent of arable land. And around 14’000 farms did not use fungicides and insecticides. Think about what that means. Farmers receive direct payments for not using plant medicine. There is nothing comparable in human medicine, although medicines also end up in the environment. So, who would come up with the idea of compensating doctors for treating as few diseases as possible? Politics focuses one-sidedly on reducing the use of crop production products without having the necessary alternatives in their quiver. As long as the environmental impact is reduced on paper, it is accepted that production will suffer. This acceptance of actually avoidable crop losses is state-sponsored food waste. And how ecological the imports are that replace this non-production is another matter.
But what do these figures mean for the intended promotion of crop cultivation? The responsible office provides the answer itself. In its agricultural report, the Federal Office for Agriculture (FOAG) writes that crop protection can no longer be guaranteed.
However, this realization has no effect. The federal government continues to withdraw functioning crop protection products from the market and at the same time blocks innovative alternatives. It is obvious that the calculation cannot work out. Politicians see plant cultivation as a growth market and at the same time are slowing it down.
Yields fall, quality suffers and food imports increase. Security of supply is being jeopardized. This contradicts the goals of sustainable agriculture and the political demands for more domestic plant products. An active reduction in domestic food production is not only contrary to consumer interests, but also increases dependence on imports from countries that are themselves suffering from the consequences of climate change.
Of course, the risks to the environment must be continuously reduced. The best way to do this is with modern, precisely effective crop protection products that can be applied with pinpoint accuracy. After all, agriculture is only sustainable if it can continue to fulfill its basic mission of producing affordable food for the Swiss population in the future. Without adequate crop protection, the three sustainability goals cannot be reconciled.
The agricultural report is therefore a green-colored declaration of capitulation. Beneath the ecological cloak, helplessness is evident. The ongoing withdrawal of proven crop protection products and the blocking of modern alternatives remains a taboo in the agricultural report. Instead, a song of praise is sung for new direct payment programs that compensate farmers if they do without plant protection. Even if the hasty withdrawal of crop protection products without alternatives is counterproductive and such incentive systems for the non-production of food are highly questionable, even against the backdrop of tight public finances.
What needs to be done? First of all, the problems should be clearly called out. The interests of the environment, agriculture and society can only be reconciled if sustainability is considered comprehensively. Comprehensive sustainability includes ecological, economic and social components. A one-sided focus on ecological goals can itself jeopardize ecological goals by stifling domestic production and shifting the production of our food abroad. It would be better to open up the narrow ecological view and, in addition to ecology, also enable regional production that offers affordable products for consumers and at the same time secures farmers an income commensurate with their efforts. If neither the means of production are available nor the producer price is right, it will become increasingly difficult to find young farmers. However, an agricultural and food strategy without farmers is certainly not sustainable.
Your swiss-food editorial team
