- 2002 -
Foreword 
by Bertrand HERVIEU,
President of the Bruges Group
At its birth, the European Union set out to fashion a framework favourable to agricultural production in order to shelter some of its farmers from the rigours of the market, and to guarantee its food security and autonomy. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) rapidly brought undeniable successes, but it also attracted strong and justified criticism. For some years now, it has been apparent that past agricultural management methods are not equal to the task of assuring agriculture a future in step with the necessities of today. On the social level, pressures on the environment, the industrialization of production, and the abandonment of the less productive regions represent a cost which society is increasingly reluctant to accept. Agriculture, founded on the management of nature, now finds itself alienated from nature itself. Food has become an abstract reality, as methods of processing have erected a sort of screen between production and consumption. Agricultural practices have become incoherent, even aberrant, in the eyes of the layman. Agriculture, the art of feeding mankind, has lost the legitimacy which it formerly enjoyed.
On the political level, the CAP has shown itself to be incapable of responding to the new challenges which confront Europe; responses which should include contributing to the integration of territories whilst respecting their diversity, facilitating the integration of new candidate countries, regulation of globalization, and the advent of new international relationships. Against this general background, a score of Europeans from all generations founded the Bruges Group, named after the Flemish town where they first met in 1995 at my invitation and that of Edgard Pisani, the former French Minister of Agriculture. The participants, who come from agricultural organizations, research institutes and environmental protection associations, originate from a score of different countries both members of the European Union and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. This is not a circle of experts, but a gathering of citizens - men and women alike - who are knowledgeable about agricultural and rural matters and who represent the diverse interests and feelings of society at large. Committed Europeans, the members of the Bruges Group bring their analyses to bear upon a changing reality and attempt to formulate principles which may inform the development of a renewed Common Agricultural Policy in tune with the issues of today. One of the major areas of reflection of this group is to call for far greater social mobilization around the agricultural question. Agriculture is not just a matter for farmers and specialized bodies. It represents a major issue for society at large, for it occupies half of our territory, manages an essential part of our water and soil resources, provides indirect employment for a considerable number of people, feeds all of our consumers and is a key element in our relations with other regions of the world. All Europeans can legitimately feel concerned with the future of agriculture and of agricultural policy. And they should be - as users of rural areas, as taxpayers, as consumers and as citizens.
The first edition of this booklet was published in 1996 in France, Spain and the Netherlands. Since then the debate has intensified and ideas have progressed. Many non-agricultural networks and associations have contributed to the debate, bringing new preoccupations to the attention of professional organizations and European bodies. The concept of multifunctionality has crystallized thought on how agriculture provides non-market services such as environmental protection to society. Contractual policies have developed, notably in France through the CTE (Contrats Territoriaux d'Exploitation: Rural Farming Contracts). From now on, a better distribution of public payments may occur through diverse procedures adopted by the European Union such as modulation, eco-conditionality and the subsidy ceiling. Despite these undeniable advances, many of the observations which we made in 1996 remain valid today. In particular, the reforms set in place in the framework of Agenda 2000 have not succeeded in significantly reducing the current divide between, on the one hand, an agricultural world largely inward-looking and hostage to its short term logic, and on the other hand a European society imbued with a renewed vision of modernity and confronted with major challenges: the single currency, enlargement, institutional reform, the internationalization of trade, and changes in lifestyles and workplace relations... Unable to reach a sufficiently solid consensus around a unifying agricultural and rural project, the European Union has become weakened by the divisions which separate its members: negotiations resemble one-off arbitration exercises instead of embracing an outlook which may bring energies into synergy. Torn between the necessity to change and the desire to preserve what has already been achieved, the EU is not succeeding in forming the alliances necessary to back up its proposals at the global level. The integration of candidate countries is constantly put off. In such a context, the laisser-faire option is gaining ground and is appealing to more and more European decision-makers, disillusioned by the complexity of the agricultural question. This does not do justice to the European Union. Farmers, whose endeavours are already prey to the vagaries of nature and who are finding it hard to accommodate political uncertainty, are without doubt the first to pay the price.
It is because a number of the observations which we made in 1996 are still valid today that we have decided to reedit this book, adapting its content to the new factors which have emerged, particularly on the international level, since first publication. The first observation concerns the progress in negotiations with candidate countries with regard to EU enlargement. The Bruges Group has opened up to new members from these countries in order to take fuller account of future issues, and held a working seminar in Poland to that end. The second observation concerns the increasing importance of the international dimension in our reflections upon the policy issues surrounding agriculture. We have already raised the importance of this by underlining the necessity to guarantee food security, particularly for developing countries, and by highlighting the dangers inherent in an aggressive EU export policy. But since the events of Seattle, it has become abundantly clear that the rise of liberalism is going to provoke much wider mobilization which, in turn, would once more shine the spotlight upon the food question - global governance, the role of international institutions and, beyond this, a sense of the future and of the ability of people to influence the course of history. What future is there in a process of globalization orchestrated by the United States, in which the collective interest adds up to the sum of certain private interests? This question is of concern to all continents, including our own. Then we witnessed the tragic events of September 11 2001. We should not overestimate the scope of the grand resolutions made in this context. But we should take stock of the risk of instability which characterizes the new century. We must reassert the need for global co-ordination of economic policy, for the democratization of negotiation processes, and for the respect of collective interests. We explain below that the emergence of a multipolar world is a matter of urgency. We should encourage the development of regional groupings seen as policy integration areas within which exchanges are stimulated and regulated. Like the European Union, these groupings made up of countries of similar status will participate in the construction of stabilized markets. As for international trade negotiations, they must be organized around one priority: the reduction of inequality between countries, between territories, and between individuals. The fight against poverty rests upon the ability of the countries of the South to preserve markets for their farmers. The European Union must guarantee them this right which it has claimed for itself. And that is where agricultural policy comes in again. The growing importance of concerns about the environment, rural development and food security do not excuse us from renewed reflection upon the organization of markets, mechanisms of trade and protection, and the place of farmers in the world.
Managing to weigh up all of these challenges, conceiving of a future sufficiently promising to bring together the expectations and the plans of today and tomorrow... much remains to be done. Much remains to be debated. The Bruges Group hopes to contribute to this debate, and invites the other sectors of European society to play their part.
Download » 
» Top «
