for the people | for the planet | for the future
Friends of the Earth Europe asbl Rue d’Edimbourg 26 | 1050 Brussels | Belgium
Tel. +32 2 893 10 00 | Fax +32 2 893 10 35 | [email protected] | www.foeeurope.org
Resource efficiency in Europe
Reducing Europe’s land dependency and its
impacts
for the people | for the planet | for the future
2/ 23
Resource efficiency in Europe Reducing Europe’s land dependency and its impacts 3rd of December 2012 – The Press Club, Rue Froissart 95, Brussels Conference notes
Opening
Judith Merkies – MEP, Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats Page 3
What are the causes of Europe’s land footprint?
Paul Speight – Deputy Head, Agriculture, Forests and Soil unit, DG Environment Page 5
Duncan Williamson – Senior Policy Advisor, WWF UK – Land and Sustainable Diets Page 7
Ruth Kelly – Economic Policy Advisor, Oxfam UK – Causes of Europe’s land footprint Page 9
Ronan Uhel, EEA, Head of Programme, Natural Systems and Vulnerability, EEA Page 10
Can Europe reduce its land footprint?
Karl Falkenberg – Director-General DG Environment Page 12
Dick Toet – Vice-President External Affairs, Unilever Page 13
Philipp Schepelmann – Project Manager, Material Flows and Resource Management, Page 15
Wuppertal Institute
Michael Warhurst – Resources and Consumption Coordinator, Page 16
Friends of the Earth Europe
Discussion Page 17
Friends of the Earth Europe gratefully acknowledges financial assistance from all its donors. Detailed information about Friends of the Earth Europe’s funding can be found at: www.foeeurope.org/about/english.htm The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of Friends of the Earth Europe and cannot be regarded as reflecting the position of the funder(s) mentioned above. The funders cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information this document contains. Printed on recycled paper.
for the people | for the planet | for the future
3/ 23
Opening
Judith Merkies – MEP, Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats
Are many silver bullets that need to be fired to solve this
High demand for food, oil, biofuels
More dependent on imports that others
4.3 football fields per person being used – ecological footprints
In future – only a quarter of a football field for every person
Really need to disrupt our ways, do something completely different
What EU does has impact on global level.
Jigsaw puzzle with 50,000 tiny pieces - can be put together provided willing to put every piece
in
Europe has to think first of original solutions as most dependent
Earth overshoot day earlier every year in Europe – we are making an ecological debt
Economic debt handed down to children as well
Is this inheritance we want to leave behind?
150% earth ecological production used every year
Solutions?
Meat important and extremely sensitive issue
Need to make less sensitive that but don’t know how
Politicians need to know how to reduce meat use
Meat taxation? – bring in money... reduce meat consumption
Start with uniform food labelling to make right purchases
Tax resources in different way – integrate internal cost to environment and society
Resource material taxation – and reduce labour taxes
If shifting towards that have to shift it from labour – as tax heavy in Europe
Have to make use of secondary raw materials cheaper
Different business models and different ways to measure
Eg Puma include social and environmental figures in yearly report
Clothes have big burden – need to make trendy to reuse and recycle
AT COP15 EEB did ‘I pledge’ activity for New Year (eg no meat, take train more) and could
calculate CO2 reduction
Need something where can measure what do – we want to see the benefit saved / what
you’ve brought to world
Netherlands and 9 others in EU most land import dependant in world – Germany and UK at
top
Co-ordinated action from Europe can make difference
Doha – COP conference – Europe wants to lead but had no followers when look back
Europe together wants to lead, as it is in our own benefit to become less import dependent,
and if get followers, then have important inheritance to share
It works for the economy
So want to be leaders
Discussion
for the people | for the planet | for the future
4/ 23
Can you frame present day in fashion phrasing on competitiveness – how best match with the
issues today?
Judith Merkies (JM) If we reduce land use and change our way of production can we still be competitive?
Should we ban competitiveness?
If we obtain product – loses attraction once have it
Have to move towards service economy (rather than products) so can change / upgrade it,
and a lease society
E.g. ipad 1 – battery lasts longer than ipad 3
Why can’t get ipad 1 back and make faster / put new gadgets in and extend lifetime
Can be more competitive and resource efficient
Gertjan Storm, University of Maastricht EU budget, CAP – probability of a more coherent approach to issues (meat, land use)?
If answer is adaptive policy making – leave margin to adapt policy to on-going changes to be
able to react in 2015 and not have to wait to 2020?
JM
Good but painful question - ecology isn’t foremost in mind of all politicians and political
leaders
Geared towards austerity, accelerate growth and create jobs
Key is – it is possible to do both at same time, but fail to say possible to have ecological
growth
No – these policies will not be coherent, meat and meat production is not in CAP, and
taxation is not competence of EU either
So won’t have coherent package
Too compartmentalised – either green or industrial
Yet convergence slowly being seen, but not large
Need real growth model that is interesting for politicians.
If able to find real growth model, this is the benefit / money – have part of silver bullet
If stay in idealistic side have access to big policy
Ariadna Rodrigo, Friends of the Earth Europe
RER published last year, platform on resource efficiency
7th EAP talks about resource efficiency but doesn’t have targets / direction – repeats RER
No development of debate
2014 – New Parliament and Environment Commissioner
Potocnik’s baby is RER – will new Commissioner have new policy of their own?
Will resource efficiency be a fashion that will die and be replaced by something else?
Should we fight for resource efficiency to be on political debate for longer than 2014?
JM
for the people | for the planet | for the future
5/ 23
Aim in Parliament – doing this against backdrop of an ideal of a green world – more resource
efficient
Try to wrap message in industrial gains
Been working on lease / service economy
Mr Schepelmann, Wuppertal Institute – been commissioned by Parliament to look at green
business mode to accelerate growth
Convince of real economic benefit – commodities expensive.
Want to have new jobs and reduce dependency on everything
Can keep on agenda if find part of silver bullet – but will fail if keep on agenda as ideal?
Introducing legislation – but not just about new legislation, also about good implementation
and maintenance of existing laws e.g. landfill directive, WFD, to be more resource efficient
What are the causes of Europe’s land footprint?
Paul Speight – Deputy Head, Agriculture, Forests and Soil unit, DG Environment http://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/news/paul_speight.pdf
Have been working on land as a resource quite a bit within the Environment DG, and also on
rural resource efficiency.
Act of consumption not a problem – to assess problem got to be about how much, what, in
what way.
Lots of different studies out there
Within EU:
• Population stable and not massive changes, apart from demand for biomass
increasing
But trade is very important (as are population flows)
• As global picture – joined up world, what happens in rest of world will impact us
• E.g. diet and waste are pressures, especially if China and Brazil want to consume like
we do
• Merit analysis and action
Not just land – also water & phosphorus subject to similar scarcity in the future.
Causes? Food and the western diet
World consumption - grain fed poultry and pigs vs. grazing
Nuances to make but overall picture incredible - if carry on throughout world does look fairly
frightening
Meat - grazing vs grain fed; might not want to plough grazing land anyway.
• E.g. example of soy from South America.
New Klondike – bio rush not gold rush • Traditional – wool, furniture, tallow...
• Or, the new competitors:
• Biofuels (Renewable Energy Directive)
• Biomass (Biomass strategy) – next hot potato
• Green Chemistry (biorefineries) – proper added value, and then get some energy to?
• Bio-economy (all of the above)
• Bio-economy not new
for the people | for the planet | for the future
6/ 23
• Doing lots of new things at same time
• Not entirely co-ordinated
• E.g. biofuels, biomass, plus more added value – might be sensible – value added product and
still get energy from afterwards
• How much is possible? – lack of any convincing study
• How get focus on more added value bio economy products?
• How much would need for bio-economy?
• Food will come either way, so will displace something else
• Uneasy from environmental point of view
• Not neglecting our own land is important – if treat properly will get productivity from it,
whatever want to get from it
• How much would be needed?
Loss of EU land:
• Not valuing our land properly at moment – sealing it over at large rates (equivalent to sealing
Cyprus in 10 years, Berlin every year)
• UK debate on converting land to housing - 3% UK land for housing being proposed
• Not massive part of overall consumption but can argue should at least use that land efficiently
• Loss of soil – losing a lot of land to soil erosion
• When land use is under pressure, environment is the fuse that blows
• Habitats directive figures – where other uses are profitable, then most under threat
• Fundamental result is the environment loses out
• No matter how cascade works down – e.g. displace food – environment will always take hit
• 2030 -2050 – very complex, EU world relationship depends on politics as to how see things
Conclusion • No-one knows exactly what will happen worldwide, but outlook is challenging
• Land, water, biomass and fertilisers/ food are all part of the same input/output system – no
point looking at in isolation
• EU/world relationship can be viewed in different ways, but no doubt on linkages
• Prudent to improve resource efficiency and to increase resilience, whatever happening in
future – any gaps, environment suffers
Michael Warhurst (MW)
• What work is being done in your unit at the moment on land / virtual land?
Paul Speight
• Preparing for land as a resource communication – have one piece work on-going, more plans
and colleagues helping with more technical work
• Joint research centre – good in hose competence
• Land as a resource is a study looking at how might get more from management of land –
multifunctional approach\more ecosystem services whilst maintain capacity, more wood while
eco diversity maintained, due around end 2012
• Big new project next year- synthesis land, biomass and food – get indicators and targets
• To help come to suggest indicators and targets
for the people | for the planet | for the future
7/ 23
Duncan Williamson – Senior Policy Advisor, WWF UK – Land and Sustainable Diets http://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/news/duncan_foe_land_use_talk.pdf
• We know most of the problems and solutions, there is just a lack of will to move to solutions
• Awkward – might cost money, not very nice,
• Will either be forced to do solutions or will choose to do them but running out of time to make
choice
• Sustainable diets – looks at environment, society (health) and whether economically
beneficial
• Some WWF offices are prioritising food
• 3.5 billion over-nourished – obese, and same number starving / micro-nutrition deficiency (this
equals half world’s population)
• We produce enough food to feed at least 10 billion people
• 33% food is being thrown away.
• We’re eating the planet – biggest part of GHG emissions are from food not energy
• 70% freshwater is used to produce food
• 30% global energy in food system
• Biggest cause biodiversity loss is agriculture
• Need to shift debate, have more joined up debate
• 27% of Europe’s environment impacts come from food
• Meat is the elephant in room - 1/3 of all farmland is used for the production of animal feed
• Roughly 26% of land is used for pasture or grazing – get carbon sequestration.
• If swap meat for dairy – water footprint goes up, carbon goes down.
• Not just red meat – white meat probably worse in long term?
• 30% of human induced biodiversity loss is related to livestock production
• The Cerrado used to have 5% global biodiversity – lost due to soya, being exported by EU
and China for white meat.
• White meat demand going up quickly and huge cause of land use change
• Forcing people from land and slavery increasing in Brazil
• Red meat consumption plateaued / dropping in developed world – Europeans eating 400%
more chicken today than they did in 1961, and 80% more pork.
• Intensively farmed battery chicken has 12 times saturated fat as free range chicken
• WWF work on deforestation – modelling found only way to stop planetary deforestation is
through a diet shift
• Have to change eating habits now – reducing calorie consumption
• Sugar – probably most water hungry crop on the planet
• Being produced more quickly every where
• E.g. irrigated land in Sudan, one plantation uses 4% of Nile water.
• Need to look at diets and consumption – sustainable diets
• Simple message on diet, eg eat more plants, eat less meat.
• Livewell programme WWF UK and now Europe
• Sustainable diet coalition – with Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Sustain
• To show can all agree – positive powerful message
Conclusions • The western diet is neither healthy nor sustainable (GHG)
for the people | for the planet | for the future
8/ 23
• A healthy diet is sustainable and affordable
• In Europe we are eating too much
• We don’t necessarily need to produce more, just produce better, waste less and distribute
more equitably
• We can feed the planet in a healthy, equitable manner
Janneke van Veen, Ovam (JV)
• New technology to reduce footprint – fake meat
• Use land to grow plants faster – intensive agriculture in Netherlands
Duncan Williamson (DW)
• No problem with it, if has lower carbon / water footprint
MW
• Friends of the Earth work in Paraguay
• Lots of organisations have gone down ‘no deforestation’ route – helping create demand for
Cerrado
• In Paraguay becoming very violent
• Things get shifted – but land is land
DW
• Can do something on production, technology, but not enough on its own – have to look at
consumption at same time
• Every organisation in UK refusing to work on consumption – because no-one likes you talking
about it
• Got to do all of them – working on all of them way forward
Unknown participant
• Meat consumption as key environmental indicator
• Pressure for over-production – channel plants into meat production
• Subsidies for agriculture skew
• Start paying real costs of food – plant based food will be much cheaper than meat based
DW
• Have to pay real cost of food production
• Fossil fuels driving cheap agriculture
• Look at how treat subsidies for more sustainable market
for the people | for the planet | for the future
9/ 23
Ruth Kelly – Economic Policy Advisor, Oxfam UK – Causes of Europe’s land footprint Causes of Europe’s land footprint
• Kate Raworth pulled together discussion paper (see http://oxf.am/oef) – how to reconcile
planetary boundaries with sense of justice
• People need to consume less while others need to consume more
• Where pressure points are regarding what planet can handle and can’t
• All coalesce around land as resource
• Millions living in extreme poverty
• To decide what social boundaries should be inside circle of ‘planetary donut’ – looked at what
government priorities were for Rio – what cared about?
• Food, water, energy, etc - also coalesce about land
• Is call to be more efficient but also to be fairer
• Successful frame to help people think about these issues
• Not a lot of land available in EU
• People say quite a lot available outside EU but can be challenged
• Less and less usable land
• Deserts / infertile
• Pressure from outside
• Pressure from inside – concept of empty land and assumption that lots of land available
• But very little if any land without prior claim that people have no dependence upon – unseen
• Small scale agriculture / pastoralism
• Techniques that preserve soil, left fallow, left to maintain valuable biodiversity (often called
sacred land)
• Cultural importance of land to indigenous and other people
• Important as safety net in increasingly unpredictable world – will make sure people do better
in case of shock
• Income dependent livelihoods very fragile – if have some land will do better in face of shock
• Weather disasters etc
• Land use and land import
• Same debate repeated now in Mozambique – partnership between Brazil / EU – looking at as
empty land with lots of potential that can be developed in the way the Cerrado has been
• Not recognising social and economic problems associated with development in Cerrado
EU biofuels target • Almost universally land based biofuels, mainly food based
• Commission has put a cap on amount of food crops at around 5%, around current levels
• Paper on land & water and biofuels – in 2008, biofuels around 3.5% of transport, enough food
to feed 127 million people could be grown on the land used to grow these biofuels
• Where is this land? Lots from outside EU, mainly biodiesel – soil, palm oil, also ethanol from
outside EU, makes up 80%
• Around 40% biodiesel & around 25% bioethanol came from outside EU in 2008
• Much of the 3.5% - and more if go up to 5% or beyond – will come from outside
• Food cap is good idea, but need to recognise that the 5% will still come from land-based
biofuels
• Also countries within EU are already setting higher targets anyway
• Real battle – false solution
• Pressure around the world – partners of NGO – threatened by biofuel use
for the people | for the planet | for the future
10/ 23
• EU mandates not the only ones, but are important
• EU has responsibility to see biofuel targets are causing the release of GHG and having
unacceptable impact on land and food prices
Emerging debates • Beyond biofuels targets
• Land deals happening due to increased consumption
• When happening in areas of weak governance, will be associated with human rights abuses
etc.
• White meat- land to feed chickens has to come from somewhere
• Human rights abuses – won’t respect people’s rights to compensation
• Are emerging debates on land and transparency
• Legislation on extractives and forests sectors
• Land grabbing, people living in extreme poverty - need to tackle not just drivers but also
governance
• Need to explore what EU is doing to drive land grabbing and what we can do to help countries
that want to respect people human rights, respect people and planet
• How engage companies, so when invest in agriculture – respect people and planet.
• Biofuels is mandate so resulted in very fast, unsustainable expansion of sector
– the speed makes impact even worse on local level
• 5 / 10 years needed to set up bioenergy export industry in sustainable way
• Short time period causing distress
• Oxfam works with communities around the world who do produce and export
• One of biggest markets for sub-Saharan food growers is the sub Saharan food market – not
export.
• Biofuels and fixed target haves proven to be negative
• Have to challenge
• What is best opportunity for livelihood of poorest?
• More flexible and precautionary approach needed in the future
Ronan Uhel, EEA, Head of Programme, Natural Systems and Vulnerability, EEA http://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/news/eea_foe_land_resource_03dec2012.pdf
• Land is a finite resource
• Start with domestic response - much we can do here
• For around 3ha we use here in EU, we import around 1ha
• We also export land
• Have finite stock of land and water i.e. we have no more stock of land in Europe that we can
turn to large-scale productivity
• Are we being efficient in using the stock we have?
• Land use changes in Europe are slowing down…
• But land take is increasing, mostly for building -and much faster than population and growth
• Intensity well spread all over Europe
• Housing is a major driver
• Agricultural land is for sale - this equals 80% of land uptake by urban
• Higher revenue for farmers to sell land for retirement than to carry on farming
• French - big debate in 2011 on land take and food production.
for the people | for the planet | for the future
11/ 23
• Key issue - land pricing
• Germany has policies and targets to limit land take / artificialisation
• Land is important multi-functional asset.
• No EU country has systemic approach to land management.
• Response should be systemic
• Don't have policy coherence or implementation in many places
• Where can coherence come from?
• Coherence will stem from having clear identification of objectives
• Resource Efficiency Roadmap (RER) states no net loss of land
• How to translate it back into policies?
• Goes along with 15 % ecosystems restoration target in Biodiversity Strategy - how connect
the two?
• How going to characterise land take?
• And no net loss -against what?
• Many EU policies have land related components - CAP, biodiversity strategy, TENs, CC
adaptation, etc. but no identification of the way they connect
• What policy coherence might be? Territorial agenda & Action plan 2020 offer a policy platform
where to identify gaps in a coherent framework
• But obstacles almost everywhere - observations & data, scenario development, policy
analysis tools. Physical accounts for land and terrestrial ecosystems possible today, across
and for Europe: let's do it systematically.
• Urban sprawl a key trend- how can evolve in future? Reconsidering green infrastructure
potentials; spatial /urban planning a key role in facilitating and delivering GI
• How do you approach that, in particular at European scale, where it is very relevant?
Sébastian Godinot, WWF EPO
• Does EEA have capacity to bring data together?
Ronan Uhel
• Obstacles everywhere, point is to create platform to identify gaps
• Urban sprawl – local problem, how look at EU level – have built system built on kilometre grid,
now moving to 100 m grid.
JV • We need to produce less and consume less – we need a paradigm shift
for the people | for the planet | for the future
12/ 23
Can Europe reduce its land footprint? Karl Falkenberg – Director-General DG Environment
• Good to have this debate about land, land use and soil
• Commission tried to argue for some time we need to look at soil and land use as one of
resources for which we have no EU wide policy in place.
• We don’t have policy in these areas because we have blocking minority of five member states
that soil and land use as national issues only
• Those MS feel that soil isn’t mobile, doesn’t cross borders so argue why should EU have any
influence
• Been arguing against this – soil problems starting with simple contamination issues lead to
water and air pollution, also land erosion through winds, we’re losing precious fertile soils
throughout Europe etc
• So need to make it clear we’ve interest in having coordinated policy instrument at hand
• MS have said decisions only by unanimity – same idea that land issues are national issues
• Refreshing - these questions obviously need to be seen in global perspective
• Started looking at this perspective as resource efficiency - land as one resource which is
getting scarce, many pressures
• Urban sprawl is serious challenge - every 10 years an area size of Cyprus.
• Have pressures from many areas
• Agriculture is one element, but it goes well beyond this, and well beyond the food issue
• Need to come to comprehensive understanding of these problems and differentiate what we
can do here in Europe and wider issues to be tackles globally
• Need to start doing what we preach at home to be credible
• Need to give ourselves means to what started putting out as target in RER / 7th EAP – want to
move to no further net land loss in future
• Because there is no alternative to this
• Means much more serious planning, and political will to implement this
• Citizens will be expected to make right choices and won’t work- need top down decision that
will have to be implemented according to regional and national realities
• Not going to work without top-down leadership.
• Has to be a binding target and then can start talking about subsidiarity
• 9 billion people in 2050 – challenges clear to everyone here
• How fit into world perspective? A lot of right things said this morning
• Not sure the perspective is we all live in high rise apartment blocks and vegetarian diet?
• Not convinced that this will be future policies
• Can we have policies that take into account regional realities?
• Can we implement in Europe a policy that considers land as a resource, water, minerals, air
quality?
• There are many ideas and possibilities out there to make sure we do this
• How do we deal with very substantial demographic growth in rest of world?
• Say have to maintain farmers to feed rest of world
• After years of food export, when other countries complained, downscaled our production of
agriculture and reduced exports so developing countries can grow more
• Now looking like going other way – in 2050 land will be a scarce resource and Europe has to
use our own land to feed world and not grow fuel
• Can’t grow food for developing world but can’t grow biofuels
• Think key to make choices. Wrong to say export wrong and biofuels on this export land
wrong.
for the people | for the planet | for the future
13/ 23
SG
• Clarification – which Member States?
Karl Falkenberg (KF)
• Germany, UK, Netherlands, Austria and France all opposed, even though they have already
(sort of) implemented soil directive already – have better policies in place
Dick Toet – Vice-President External Affairs, Unilever
• This is an important debate for us, all products come from land apart from water
• more than 80% come from agriculture
• needs to be available, at prices we can afford
• Three angles where involved in debate
• Own sustainable living plan
• EREP
• Consumer goods forum – global
Sustainable living plan • started benchmarking products in 2006/7
• published plan in 2010
• Plan has 3 pillars –
• nutrition and health
• Reduction of environmental impacts
• Enhancing livelihood of smallholder farmers
• Method – used full life cycle analysis from raw material to recycling / disposal by consumers
mostly
• Measured GHG reduction – major way measuring if achieved goals and reduced impact
• Water footprint (not everywhere – 7 water scarce countries with around half of world’s
population)
• Waste footprint
• Found that the more control process ourselves, more control supply chain, the better we are
on track
• Where have difficulties – e.g. where people use hot water for showers, washing machines
• Moving from 3 rinses to one rinse – convinced a lot of consumers that is the way with
campaign
• By 2020 want to be in contact with 500,000 small-holder farmers
• In touch with 45,000 – want to be in contact regarding practices, yields etc.
• Educate and improve agriculture practices
• So better position in region where working
• Have code for sustainable agriculture – includes clause on land use, based on respecting
rights etc.
• Focussing on farmers, for big and small farmers
• Noticed that discussing and paying attention to this has already improved situation
• Also involved in resource efficiency – active participants in discussion on RER, CEO in
resource efficiency platform, working groups
for the people | for the planet | for the future
14/ 23
• Extensive discussions including regarding benchmarks
• Understanding land related benchmarks – idea that land benchmark should be included
somewhere
• Benchmarks fine, lead and dashboard
• But absolutely need to set targets, set them fast and start working with them – not long
discussions on which target
Consumer goods forum • Little known group
• Talks about health and nutrition, also on sustainability
• Was involved when working in London office of Unilever
• Strength is have everyone round the table, and it moves
• Business will help to legitmately achieve zero net deforestation by 2020.
• Need to have the drive to get to target, important element
• Should be simple and inspirational, not three lines
• Doesn’t matter if know going to 100% make it, need drive to get there, if not going to get
there, seek advice on how to do this.
• Can’t see reason why not move forward on this
Footprinting exercise generated sustainable criteria - sustainable sourcing targets? • Want 100% agriculture material sustainable sourced by 2020
• In EU – vegetables are from ‘sustainable agriculture’ – see documentation.
• Biodiversity, soil management etc
• Suppliers don’t supply that yet, but aim is by 2020
• Working with suppliers to get there
Martin Wildenberg, GLOBAL 2000
• Fair prices for agriculture products important if want farmers to do sustainable agriculture
• Not easy to say what is fair – small holder and EU farms, problem
Dick Toet
• Reflected in sustainable programmes, farmers get fair price
for the people | for the planet | for the future
15/ 23
Philipp Schepelmann – Project Manager, Material Flows and Resource Management, Wuppertal Institute
http://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/news/schepelmann_2012_land_use.pdf • How can Europe reduce its land footprint?
• Reduction of Europe’s land footprint is extremely important
• Vitally important question for majority people on planet, but lack of political strategies
• Is quite difficult – raised 20 years ago when Friends of the Earth and Wuppertal did
Sustainable Europe project (land rucksack)
• Old question and needs to be addressed, time of brainstorming hopeful over soon
• Focus on arable land – to make question more manageable, not just total footprint but also
arable land – is the decisive area, where we are meeting absolute limits, have a limited and
specific environmental space in this area
• 3 major sources of pressure for arable land – food, fibre and biofuels
• Creating growing demand - are degrading soil, and increasing land take (forests, savannah,
grassland and crop lands)
• Political cycle –in agenda setting phase, not even at target formulation
• Grateful that Friends of the Earth putting this on agenda
• If agreement it should be on agenda in EU context, then face challenge of policy integration
• Can’t be answered by DG Environment alone
• Answer of how reduce land footprint – needs to be answered by trade, CAP, foreign policy,
research and development etc.
• Bio-economy- how use land in the future?
• Find new ways of producing meat more efficiently?
• Green chemistry, industrial policy
• What will be behind bio-economy of future?
• Still very far from policy coherence
• Still dominating belief in religion of free trade and competitive advantages
• Increasing land footprint of emerging economies
• In EU context design bottom up and top down strategies
• Bottom up - improve sectoral policy integration and impact assessment
• Top down -
• EU target metabolism – where biomass should come from?
• Bio-economy - Want to grow in EU or abroad?
• Policy co-ordination – lacking leadership in Europe
Elements to achieve reduction of land footprint To increase biomass supply:
• What can Europe produce sustainably?
• Reduce expansion of built up area
• Reduce land degradation and subsidies
• Develop Natura 2000
To reduce biomass demand: • What can the world produce sustainably?
• Support land use planning
• How can we develop multilateral agreements,
• inform consumer s (eating meat etc)?
• Public procurement
for the people | for the planet | for the future
16/ 23
Michael Warhurst – Resources and Consumption Coordinator, Friends of the Earth Europe
http://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/news/warhurst-reducingeulandfootprint-dec12-1.pdf
• 60% of the land that the EU uses comes from outside the EU
• EU average land consumption is 1.3 hectares per capita
• China & India less than 0.4 hectares per capita.
• Germany & the UK have the 3rd & 4th highest land import in the world
• Around 80 million hectares each
• More than 3x the surface area of the UK.
Impacts of growing Europe’s land footprint • Land grabbing, loss of land rights & land-related conflicts
• Destruction of biodiversity
• Growing water stress
• High food prices & impacts on poverty
• Expensive imports of land-based resources into the EU economy, impacting balance of
payments
• Increased vulnerability of the EU economy to land issues in other parts of the world
How can we reduce Europe’s land footprint? 1. Measure our land footprint 2. Set targets to reduce our land footprint 3. Create and modify policies in order to reduce our land footprint
1) Measuring our land footprint • Land footprint = the real land area associated with an activity
• Or as close as you can get it, with transparency on methods, assumptions.
• Basic methodology clear, more work needed on fully standardised approach & better
data sources
• Best used in association with the other resource use indicators
• Carbon Footprint, Water Footprint, overall material use
• This allow you to see trade offs, e.g. move from oil to biofuel?
• The ‘four footprints’ indicators should be one part of the EU’s economic indicators, e.g. within
EU2020.
2) Setting targets • It’s well known that targets create action
• Measuring by itself is a weaker motivator
• It’s clear that the EU mustn’t increase its land footprint
• Targets?
• Cutting EU’s net land import by 50% (?) by 2020
• Focuses net land trade or land import dependence
• With burden sharing around the EU
• Cutting EU’s land footprint by x% by y
• Focussing on absolute level, not net trade.
3) Creating policies • Informed policymaking:
• Land footprint & other footprints in impact assessment.
• Stop going in the wrong direction:
for the people | for the planet | for the future
17/ 23
• Redesign biofuel, biomass, bio-based economy policies for a land constrained world.
• Stop waste
• Avoid food waste, focus on reuse and recycling of textiles & other land-based
materials.
• Change consumption
• Promote land footprint awareness, promote low meat meals, public procurement etc.
• Encourage land footprint reduction by companies
• Get companies to measure their land footprint & create their own policies to reduce it,
to encourage them to reduce their land use.
including in their own catering & their supply chain.
• Respect land rights
• The EU should respect, promote & implement the international “Voluntary Guidelines
on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the
Context of National Food Security”
Conclusions • Land footprint is an effective tool for monitoring, analysis and setting targets
• Land footprint and the other resource footprints should be integrated into policy &
policymaking.
• The case for a target to reduce Europe’s land footprint is very strong
• This won’t be a straightforward process
For more info: http://www.foeeurope.org/resources Twitter: @mwarhurst Discussion Doreen Fedrigo, IEEP (DF)
• Karl – thanks for reality check on political difficulties of dealing with land use. RER does
address broad range of resources, including land and soil, 7th EAP has idea of 2020 target
sustainable use of land in Europe
• Where are we in terms of target getting?
• There is a lot in RER but not clear where must have / would like to haves are
• Lack of clarity on priorities, how we get the reality of RER?
KF
• They are all must haves, that’s why they are there
• Can’t just continue or identify a new single target, need to look at comprehensive situation
• Tried to look at comprehensive picture and to focus a lot more on overarching narrative,
interactions
• Previous EAP – more of a Christmas tree approach
• Silo approach wrong – have to work on measurement issues
• Targets important, but need to be measured - measurement is key
• Also footprint – in a way replaced rucksack approach
• Different footprinting schemes still black boxes, difficult to understand how been created
• Need to make sure don’t just fall back into silos for footprinting without thinking about social
impacts and implications
• European role internationally
• Not just Europe, but others – Rio+20 follow up.
for the people | for the planet | for the future
18/ 23
• Has to be done together with others
• Remains at forefront of own agenda
DF
• Where are we with agreeing to use dashboard of indicators?
KF
• Commission work being put across road to other institutions, parliament
MW
• Ours is a transparent approach, also fully unprotected
• Commission done consultation on indicators
• Look forward to results
• Black boxes – our work done to make sure transparent, tries to identify real amount of land
associated with something, top level, no strange multiplication factors, s avoids trade off
issues
• Building power stations to burn wood in UK ports – need to have handle on that, know what is
being done
• Top level useful – land is land, if use on hectare probably was something going on on that
land before
KF
• Seems simplistic – if agriculture uses land no more biodiversity, but working to find ways to
maintain biodiversity on agriculture land
• How to avoid averaging out real effects of land use for imported products?
• Not clear how can measure shipment – a lot of things where take global picture, have food as
have CO2 emissions
MW
• The point is to start from the best data we've got and go into more detail
• Land import data – used FAO data on yields in different countries
• Uses trade database – used by everyone else
• Don’t want it to be manipulated – brick industry wants all bricks to have single carbon footprint
• Don’t want complex fiddle factor
• Footprints can be transparent – can’t be every production line, averages like Kyoto emissions
KF
• High level figures vs. difficult to manage complexity
Philipp Schepelmann
• Not a methodological, but a political question
• Measuring impact of one tonne soya beans not a scientific problem and the details are
probably not so interesting for the audience
• Once decide going to measure impact can get experts and find a way
for the people | for the planet | for the future
19/ 23
• Already presented different options
• Political question – does EU really want to measure impacts it has on other parts of the
world?
KF
• Has aspiration to do that in RER
Patrick Mahon, WRAP
• Simplicity vs. complexity – attraction of FoEE system is simplicity
• What level of complexity do you need?
• How do you take into account in methodology quality or sustainability of land use?
• Vs. unsustainable use of land
• Had problem in UK – WRAP did piece of work on mass balance of UK
• Good figure for UK but don’t have data for outside UK for info on imports – how do we deal
with that?
Reiner Spatke, Johnson Controls • Made good experience in last months and years learning from EU Energy Efficiency Directive
– business model is right it’s just some assumptions are wrong
• Higher energy prices are, more interesting, if align
• Look for 3 things – energy consumption avoidance, make efficient use of energy, and look at
what energy you use
• Examples where can promise energy saving and pay back
• Need in principle to look – what immediate vs. long term price tag e.g. for land
• What think are right targets?
SG
• Commission – resource productivity lead indicator, don’t like aggregating as hides trade offs.
• Footprint family better suited
• Set of few, not too many or too few, big step forward in terms of measuring impact
• Mustn’t waste too much time discussing if black box or not, may not be perfect, can improve
with future versions, don’t have time to wait for prefect version
• Hope Commission will be supporting family of footprints and move forward to next steps –
everyone agreed we need targets for 2020 and 2030
• Need to set targets, need to move forward
• Business wants one indicator to hide all trade offs
KF
• Whole range of difficult questions
• We need something even if imperfect, see how can be improved
• Agree we shouldn’t wait for perfection but need a lead indicator
• Can say have obtained 2% growth
• And add this was done with water / land footprint – headline will be 2% growth
• Success of economies measured in GDP - this is where the interest is
• Find indicators that can talk to each other, can bring back to one number
• Need to make effort to get one lead indicator, even if imperfect
for the people | for the planet | for the future
20/ 23
• Then go to dashboard of more finely tuned indicators – agreed but need to know what
limitations of different indicators are – or likely to make wrong policy choices
• E.g. ILUC factor - same institutes give different figures on diesel / ethanol year to year
• Need some level of certainty but not perfection
• When take debate back to agriculture / food
• Have substantially increased yields per hectare
• Will have to put pressure on yields and efficiency with prices – ensure better return
• Prices – are very important. Ethical issues – can be paid by rich.
• Need policy mix rather than single aspect to drive policy forward
• Efficiency gains going to be basis of what have to push for
• Even with prices can’t wait for actors to bring back what want
MW
• GDP does work, as is about lots of money and money can be added together
• But one single number for beyond GDP won’t work as people won’t know what means
• Ultimate in fiddle factors, not simpler
• Would suggest more transparent Beyond GDP approach, not a single number
• Government want to know about imports – needs to be better organised than is at moment
• Imports issue – quality of data, need commitment to do this, key role for Eurostat to improve
this data, but in short term should use available data
• Quality of agriculture
• No, just quantity (key to sell what really done – no fiddle factors again) – that is something in
parallel
• Combine with other indicators - example from Austria
• Top level – can put with other things – supermarkets work
• Key business model is “meal as a service” – got something with price, health and
environmental impact
• not about trying to ramp up efficiency of individual components, balance of ingredients most
important issue
• Idea of trying to idea of how we get low impact meals that are cheaper and healthier – could
have substantial impact
• Efficiency of producing single elements more marginal
Gertjan Storm, University of Maastricht
• Lack of political incentives, risk and uncertainties & planetary boundaries – would like to see
governments take responsibility & accountability on this issues
• Adaptive policies useful instrument to avoid lock in silo structure
• Use this complex, flexible approach in 2014 for EREP conclusions.
• Integrated due to complexity
• Complexities – so need integrated policy making
Ariadna Rodrigo, Friends of the Earth Europe
• When work at economic level, don’t only use GDP, eg employment levels more important
that GDP in Spain
• In statistical system, use all numbers to get comprehensive picture
• It is about how we use indicators as well as the set we have
• Need to use indicators for policy making, in impact assessments.
for the people | for the planet | for the future
21/ 23
• E.g. say don’t accept policy that increases land footprint – get integration
• How to ensure policy integration – prerequisite?
• How does Commission see that going ahead?
• Population growth vs consumption levels – if don’t consume a lot, not problem
• Consume in fair way, share environmental space
• Land footprint of food, fibre – what about other goods, eg laptop?
• Have huge land footprint.
• WFD revision – could reduce footprints with repairability and re-use targets- should we have
in policy?
• Lease model – upgrade – not addressing these market failures
• Think about pioneering new business models in Europe
KF
• Repair economy etc – avoiding waste
• Europe is only place that has waste hierarchy
• In EU have directives in place – e.g. removal of batteries
• Important to look at mineral mining and all resources
• Need to move into circular economy – no other part of world as well developed in circular
economy
• Developing world population growth will create tsunami of waste
• Need to persuade them to act like we now do
• Better prepare for huge rise in demand and way we’re going to organise this
• Growing interest in dealing with footprinting including land footprinting
• Good old days when Europe was agricultural fortress, could produce food here
• Go back to not having to import food – grow in Europe
• Have our own industry
• Interest is called protectionism
MW
• Population growth is an issue – it is well established that to reduce you educate women,
improve health care for under-5s
• How can we improve wellbeing while reducing consumption levels?
• If believe in equitable world, what is the vision for Europe?
• How manage to sell it as a good thing?
• That’s why well-being and beyond GDP is important
• Can we incorporate reduced levels res use in our vision?
for the people | for the planet | for the future
22/ 23
DF • Doe EU really want to reduce its and broader EU footprint?
• Yes it is aiming to achieve that but does the rest of Europe want to play the same game?
Notes by Becky Slater, Friends of the Earth www.foeeurope.org/resources
for the people | for the planet | for the future
23/ 23
Friends of the Earth Europe asbl Rue d’Edimbourg 26 | 1050 Brussels | Belgium
Tel. +32 2 893 10 00 | Fax +32 2 893 10 35 | [email protected] | www.foeeurope.org
Friends of the Earth Europe
Member Groups Austria Global 2000
Belgium (Wallonia & Brussels) Les Amis de la Terre
Belgium (Flanders & Brussels) Friends of the Earth Bulgaria Za Zemiata
Croatia Zelena Akcija
Cyprus Friends of the Earth
Czech Republic Hnutí Duha
Denmark NOAH
England, Wales & Northern Ireland Friends of the Earth
Estonia Eesti Roheline Liikumine
Finland Maan Ystävät Ry
France Les Amis de la Terre
Georgia Sakhartvelos Mtsvaneta Modzraoba
Germany Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland (BUND)
Hungary Magyar Természetvédok Szövetsége
Ireland Friends of the Earth
Italy Amici della Terra
Latvia Latvijas Zemes Draugi
Lithuania Lietuvos Zaliuju Judéjimas
Luxembourg Mouvement Ecologique
Macedonia Dvizhenje na Ekologistite na Makedonija
Malta Friends of the Earth Malta
The Netherlands Milieudefensie
Norway Norges Naturvernforbund
Poland Polski Klub Ekologiczny
Scotland Friends of the Earth Scotland
Slovakia Priatelia Zeme
Spain Amigos de la Tierra
Sweden Jordens Vänner
Switzerland Pro Natura
Ukraine Zelenyi Svit
Friends of the Earth Europe campaigns for
sustainable and just societies and for the protection of the environment, unites more than 30 national organisations with thousands of local groups and is part of the world's largest grassroots environmental network, Friends of the Earth International.
Recommended
