EU:s gröna giv och vår mat

I juli publicerades en ingående kritik av gård till gaffelstrategin (från gård till bord) av ett tjugotal sakkunniga i matsuveränitetsfrågor. Jag hade stor nytta av den när jag skrev en artikel i Miljömagasinet om EU:s gröna giv. Men som händer alltför ofta så försvann den i flödet. Det hade det goda med sig att jag fick leta länge efter den igen och på vägen hittade en del annat.

Även efter att ha hittat mer material är denna artikel av flera sakkunniga det bästa jag hittat. Så håll till godo. Först kommer allmänna länkar till hemsidor med flera artiklar, sedan länkar till specifika artiklar med det kollektiva svaret på gård till gaffelstrategin först med en del utdrag. Därefter länkar till fler artiklar, även en del äldre om mat och handel, mat och klimat etc. Listan är inte systematiskt underbyggd utan mer beroende av vad jag hittat. Kommentarer och förbättringar är välkomna.

Några hemsidor

La Via Campesina International

European Coordination Via Campesina



Förbundet Sveriges Småbrukare

Friends of the Earth Europe

Corporate Europe Observatory

Food Governance, europeisk scholar-activists

Agroeology Now, brittisk,cholar actvist

Folkbildning (inte del av Via Campesina)

September 10, International Day Against WTO and Free Trade Agreements

Officiell information, Från jord till bord:

Några artiklar


Detta är den artikel som jag ser som mest intresant med sin detaljerade och nyanserade kritik av Gård till gaffelstratgein, möligen lite väl okritisk när det gäller handelsaspekten.

Nedan några udrag jag såg som särskilt intressanta (därefter länkar till fler artiklar):

”The F2F Strategy fails to recognize that there are various food systems and production models in Europe and that issues such as pesticide and anti-microbial use, excess fertilization, biodiversity loss, labour exploitation, and unhealthy diets promotion are essentially linked to the industrial food system. This lack of recognition restricts the ability of the F2F Strategy to adequately support small-scale producers and peasant agriculture. Instead, the F2F Strategy highlights precision farming and the digital transformation of farms, with an active role for the financial sector, rather than public policies. This can lead to further promotion of farm concentration and accelerate the disappearance of small-scale farmers that are the core of agroecology and a sustainable food systems approach.”

”Our current food system is reliant on under-paid, undeclared and precarious farm and food sector workers operating in exploitative and sub-standard working conditions (most often women and migrants).[10] The F2F Strategy supports job creation in the food and agriculture sector without clearly defining the types of jobs that will be created and for whom.”

”In general, the F2F Strategy remains rather silent on mobile pastoralism and extensive livestock systems. This sector has been damaged not only by agrarian policies oriented to industrial standards, but also environmental policies that ignored the role of pastoralism in nature protected areas. ”

”While the F2F Strategy recognises the relevance of ‘food environments’, it fails to promote changes that can deeply transform these and enable healthy and sustainable diets for all. In that form, the economic growth narrative leads the F2F Strategy to fall into contradictions between a free and informed consumer choice approach and an intervention approach through legal and normative measures (apart from the tax).”

”the F2F appears to suggest that the only role of European people in the construction of a sustainable food system is that of voting with their wallets and consuming:”

”the current trend to use public cooperation funds to ‘crowd in’ European private sector investments in agriculture leads to the producers’ incorporation into agribusiness-led value chains in which they lose the autonomy which is the basis of their resilience.”

” we regret that the reference to relevant multilateral fora cites the UN Food Systems Summit, highly deficient in transparency and legitimacy, and neglects to mention the UN Committee on World Food Security, the only global food policy forum in which the small-scale producers who feed the world and other social constituencies are full participants.”

”The claims of the F2F Strategy related to the bio-economy, bio-based (circular) economy and biotechnology are not detailed enough to give clear directions to research that is ethical and that promotes sustainable farming. Such research needs to be designed in cooperation with farmers and citizens. With respect to encompassing a systemic vision, the F2F Strategy fails to explicitly incorporate R&I processes linked to power concentration, territories and people, increasing access to seeds, land and water, and developing and supporting food and kitchen cultivation projects that guarantee the right to healthy and nutritious food and are founded on principles of social justice. We are concerned that the heavy focus on digitalization can lead to capital intensive modes of production and in turn dependency and further reduction in the number of small-scale EU farms.”

”For this reason, we consider that, rather than opening the doors to sustainable finances aimed at supporting capital intensive projects and speeding up the digitalization of low hanging fruits, the F2F Strategy must favour mechanisms for ethical finance that supports cooperatives and mutualism. Such mechanisms should be more aligned to the scale and reality of agroecological production.”

Fler artiklar

The importance of Food Sovereignty for the Farm to Fork strategy and the New Green Deal. Insights and limits of the SAM and SAPEA reports Jessica Duncan,* Marta Rivera-Ferre,** Priscilla Claeys ***

New CAP needed for the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork Strategy to Succeed

Press releaseBrussels,

2020 – a Super Year for Biodiversity?

Digital Farming Can digital farming really address the systemic causes of agriculture’s impact on the environment and society, or will it entrench them?

Blocking the chain Industrial food chain concentration, Big Data platforms and food sovereignty solutions

Research & Destroy

The factories of the industrial bioeconomy threaten the climate and biodiversity

Toxic residues through the back door

Pesticide corporations and trade partners pressured EU to allow banned substances in imported crops 16.02.2020

Social and Environmental Justice Activists React to EU Farm to Fork Strategy

European Public Health Alliance EPHA view on Farm to Fork: Start of a serious debate on the future of food systems


No Alternative to Sustainable Agriculture: How Community-Supported Farms Show the Way to Food Security in an Uncertain World

Internal market, single market or unfair market?, Article adapted from a report written for a meeting of the European coordination Via campesina in January 2020.

To put international trade in its right and fair place for changing EU agricultural policy, 2020

Open letter: Rewriting Current International Trade Rules on Agriculture to Save Peasant Farming, 2017

Globalising Hunger Food Security and the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), 2011


Global Activism in Food Politics; 2014


Visions for a new food and trade system


– Overview of all visions: Trading Ideas for a New Food System

– Corporate Europe Observatory VISION

– European Milk Board VISION

– Friends of the Earth Europe VISION

– European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions VISION

– European Public Health Alliance VISION

A People’s Food Policy

Tord Björk