By Tanishi Jaiswal

Abstract

A strange dilemma engulfs the European Union (EU) – on one hand, it is required to fulfill
the growing demand for sustainable and environmentally friendly policies and on the other,
ensure that the overall productivity isn’t hampered. Any eco-friendly policy would comprise
adequate restrictions over businesses, people, and their day-to-day operations. Of course, an
obvious effect of the same would be a significant reduction in their functioning capabilities
initially; nevertheless, once the enterprise acclimatizes itself with new sustainable
mechanisms, a steady path towards recovery follows. This path however isn’t the same for
all. One of the most affected categories of people because of this transformation is the rural
farmers. A sector so close to nature and its resources to generate income is likely to be the
one most affected by such reforms. The year 2024 has seen the wrath of organized protests
and demonstrations by the farming community across the EU. This article aims to reconcile
the two interests and devise a balanced point of view.

Introduction

A significant characteristic of the farming community worldwide is the strong spirit of unity
and harmony that it possesses. This can be significantly attributed to its uncertain nature.
There is a lingering sense of fear that encapsulates the community together as a whole. The
ROI (or Return on Investment) in the farming sector is one of the lowest when compared to
other sectors. Food – for instance, a commodity that is required to be accessible to all requires
stringent price regulations naturally. As a result, the ‘profit’ margin of ‘farming’ as a
commodity is extremely low. Amidst all these irregularities a new set of environmental
regulations seemingly lowers the already low gain threshold. In the year 2024, the European
Union found itself grappling with this very challenge as farmer protests swept across its
member states. These protests, fueled by various grievances and demands, shed light on the
complex interplay between agricultural policies, economic pressures, and social dynamics
within the EU. This essay aims to examine this very conundrum by means of a two-fold
mechanism – firstly, laying a comprehensive scheme and the demands of the protesting
farmers, and secondly, drawing a comparative analysis of protesting farmers in the EU and in
India.

Identifying the Enemy

International environment-centric agreements
The executive branch of the European Union proposed additional relaxations of climate and
environmental regulations in response to persistent tractor protests by farmers leading up to
the June EU elections. This move, intended to appease farmers, has stirred dissatisfaction
among environmentalists throughout the 27 EU member states. The Commission’s proposal
entails further easing restrictions on agriculture, despite these rules previously being hailed as
crucial for the EU’s ambitious goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050. It is interesting to
note that something as crucial as the Paris Agreement which was signed by over 195
countries or the Green Deal endorsed by the EU is being temporarily disregarded.
Considering the rapid rates of deforestation, pollution, and climate change, radical reforms
such as the Paris Convention proved to be a pleasant surprise. To counter the environmental
demons of the future, all sectors need to adopt more sustainable methods, moving forward.

The preceding fact is irrebuttable. If that is the case, who is in the wrong? Do the farmers in
the EU not realize this very pertinent risk? To answer this, it is important to take a step back
and identify the true cause. Since the 1980s, the European Union has progressively
dismantled regulations designed to guarantee fair prices for its farmers. Instead, it has heavily
relied on free trade agreements, pitting farmers worldwide against each other in a race to
produce at the cheapest possible price. This approach has ultimately undermined farmers’
incomes, leading to a cycle of growing debt and economic strain. When it came to
International agreements advocating for a supposed ‘green’ transformation, the farmers did
initially embrace this. That being said, they also emphasized that achieving this goal would
require breaking free from the paradigm of international competitiveness. While ecological
farming practices offer significant benefits for both human health and the environment, they
often entail higher costs for farmers. Therefore, to facilitate the transition to agroecology,
agricultural markets must be shielded. However, this was just not the case. Farmers in
almost eleven European Union nations experienced a significant decline in prices received for
their produce, with decreases surpassing 10 percent from 2022 to 2023. Greece and Cyprus
were exceptions to this trend, witnessing an uptick in their farmers’ sales revenues during the
same period. Therefore, European farmers found themselves confronted with an
insurmountable challenge: striving for an agroecological transition while being pressured to
produce at minimal costs. This dilemma reignited divisions among farming organizations and
differing perspectives on how to navigate these challenges have come to the forefront. In
addition to this, there are multiple testimonies of farmers highlighting the kind of imposition
upon them. Bart Dochy, a Belgium farmer, while speaking to an AP News correspondent
points out the untoward level of supervision imposed upon them by the authorities, “We are
even required to register the arrival of any artificial manure within seven days. Then it has to
be registered exactly how it is spread on every single little plot of land — how many kilos
and how it is distributed”. The use of satellite and drone images to monitor whether
‘sustainability’ regulations are being met is also not uncommon.

Some other reasons

Russia-Ukraine War

Another significant event noted in world history is marked by the re-igniting of the ongoing
Russia-Ukraine tensions which eventually transpired into a full-blown war. With trade
agreements being called off and various other sanctions being imposed on these nations, the

agrarian industry was left to bear a massive burden by itself. Poland for instance, in February
of this year witnessed massive tractor protests by farmers across the country. Following the
Russian invasion of Ukraine, various restrictions on sea shipments from Ukrainian ports were
imposed. In response to the resulting price hikes and grain shortages in parts of the Middle
East, Africa, and Asia, the European Union took action by suspending tariffs and quotas on
Ukrainian food products. This facilitated the transportation of food via rail and truck through
neighboring countries such as Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia. While this strategy
achieved some success in alleviating the situation, it also resulted in Ukrainian grain reaching
local markets in the transit countries. This influx of Ukrainian grain created tensions with
local farmers, who argued that it was driving down prices.

The Covid-19 Pandemic

Another rather momentous milestone in global diaspora was of course the untoward
pandemic that grappled the entire world. The lockdowns enforced across Europe significantly
disrupted the functioning of food supply chains. As per a survey conducted by Syngenta,
nearly half of large EU farmers, amounting to 46 percent, reported adverse impacts on their
farming operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Of these farmers, 57 percent noted a
decline in revenue and sales, while 51 percent cited disruptions in supply chains and
shortages.

Comparative Study Between the Farmer Protests in India And the EU: The Role of the Environmental Policies

As the European Union grappled with the wrath of its growers, on the other side of the world,
a similar cruise was sailing. India – a country where 45% of the workforce is involved with
agriculture, gives enough scope for one to reasonably draw parallels between the two. But
simply comparing the percentage of the farming sector in the respective economies can give
us an initial picture of how a possible protest can pan out. Agriculture accounts for a mere
4.2% of the employment across the EU. Thus, when it comes to the Indian side, enforcement
of environmental regulations is quite difficult to impose upon. Whether it can be attributed to
the lack of adjudicatory power of the state or simply the lack of income and technical know-

how of traditional Indian farmers, Indian farms are simply not materially equipped at the
moment to even carry out eco-friendly farming. A high agrarian employment index also
entails another element – a strong mechanism to enforce labor rights. Keeping these statistics
at hand, one of the key differences between the two protests was the ‘nature’ of the same.
The 2024 Indian farmer protests largely based their demands around the Minimum Support
Price (MSP) – essentially a lower slab beyond which prices for crops cannot plummet. This
provides an adequate safety net for the farmers against market fluctuations. Some other
demands encompassed – debt waivers (as per the recommendations of the Swaminathan
Commission), land acquisition compensation for land acquired by various authorities for
developmental projects, pensions for farmers and farm laborers, compensation for lives lost
during the 2020–2021 agitation, and many more. The EU protests on the other hand relied on
the following – the influx of inexpensive imports from neighboring Ukraine, delays in
subsidy payments, heavy taxation, and stringent EU regulations related to land use and
emissions. Interestingly despite the dissimilarities in origins, both water down to a single
mode of assertion – i.e. the central role of farmgate price for farmers.

The Way Forward: Addressing The Balancing Connondrom

The world is moving towards an environmental pandemonium. It is absolutely pertinent that
one must take quick and constructive steps to undo past ecological wrongs. The recent
emphasis on the severity of global climate change has been underscored by the EU’s
Copernicus Climate Change Service report, which reveals that global warming has surpassed
1.5°C throughout an entire year for the first time. Agriculture plays a crucial role in
mitigating carbon emissions to prevent a climate catastrophe. Therefore, it is imperative that
decarbonization measures are not imposed on farmers coercively. For any green transition
policy in agriculture to be effective, it must prioritize education, provide appropriate
economic incentives to promote decarbonization and ensure the full participation of farmers
in the formulation of agricultural policies. It shouldn’t be a question of placing one interest
over another. The central notion of ‘sustainability’ is its collective nature. Environmental
goals should be attributed to a combination of both penal regulations as well as a legitimate
impetus to fuel participation. The first step to this however is to address the long-drawn urban bias in agricultural management. The global farmers’ movements serve as a wake-up call in
this regard.

Author’s Bio
Tanishi Jaiswal is currently pursuing her third-year, B.A. LLB, at Jindal Global Law
School. Her areas of interest include Corporate and Commercial law. She is also
interested in assessing the legalities associated with environmental norms and schemes.

Image Source: https://images.app.goo.gl/dgZwnu7RYMpRLfAr8