Viewpoint: EU’s Farm-to-Fork policy inevitably means plowing rainforests to meet Europe’s expanding food needs
Viewpoint: EU’s Farm-to-Fork policy inevitably means plowing rainforests to meet Europe’s expanding food needs


Meet the European Union’s Farm to Fork Strategy. Considered the EU’s Green New Deal, the strategy’s goal is to make the continent carbon neutral by 2050. The plan comes with lofty goals, including the reduction of pesticide use by 50 percent and of fertilizer use by 20 percent. It also calls for farmers to remove 10 percent of farmland out of production, and transition a quarter of fields to organic production.
Farm to Fork’s goals all lead to one thing: lower food production. Based on its own analysis, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service believes the strategy will reduce European agricultural production between 7 and 12 percent. There’s no question cutting inputs decreases yields, as does organic agriculture.
And that’s the grand irony of Farm to Fork: It’s just a sleight of hand. The EU isn’t actually going carbon neutral; it’s just exporting its carbon emissions to other parts of the world. Unfortunately, that likely means we’ll continue to lose rainforests, despite the fact that they play such a pivotal role in regulating Earth’s climate.
…
But as long as environmental activists continue to fight against productional advancements, we’ll see additional environmental degradation. It’s time to abandon those backward perspectives and start looking to a more sustainable future.
This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

![]() | Videos | More... |

Video: Nuclear energy will destroy us? Global warming is an existential threat? Chemicals are massacring bees? Donate to the Green Industrial Complex!
![]() | Bees & Pollinators | More... |

GLP podcast: Science journalism is a mess. Here’s how to fix it

Mosquito massacre: Can we safely tackle malaria with a CRISPR gene drive?

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’
![]() | Infographics | More... |

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer
![]() | GMO FAQs | More... |

Why is there controversy over GMO foods but not GMO drugs?

How are GMOs labeled around the world?

How does genetic engineering differ from conventional breeding?
![]() | GLP Profiles | More... |

Alex Jones: Right-wing conspiracy theorist stokes fear of GMOs, pesticides to sell ‘health supplements’








Viewpoint — Fact checking MAHA mythmakers: How wellness influencers and RFK, Jr. undermine American science and health
Viewpoint: Video — Big Solar is gobbling up productive agricultural land and hurting farmers yet providing little energy or sustainabilty gains
Fighting deforestation with CO2: Biotechnology breakthrough creates sustainable palm oil alternative for cosmetics
Trust issues: What happens when therapists use ChatGPT?
California, Washington, Oregon forge immunization alliance to safeguard vaccine access against federal undermining
30-year-old tomato line shows genetic resistance to devastating virus
The free-range chicken dilemma: Better for birds, but with substantial costs
‘You have to treat the brain first’: Rethinking chronic pain with Sanjay Gupta