Secondo uno studio, oltre l’80% dei sussidi agricoli dell’UE sostiene la produzione di carne e latticini
https://theconversation.com/over-80-of-the-eus-farming-subsidies-support-emissions-intensive-animal-products-new-study-226853
di FengMinIsVeryLoud
21 commenti
The numbers here are striking when you actually look at the inefficiency of how we’re using EU taxpayer money.
**Feed conversion efficiency:**
* Beef has an energy efficiency of about 2%. For every 100 calories of feed, you get roughly 2 calories of beef back.
* Pigs convert at around 10%, chickens at about 13%.
* Feed conversion ratios are typically 6-10:1 for beef (meaning 6-10 kg of feed per 1 kg of meat gained), compared to around 2:1 for chicken.
**Land use:**
* According to the Poore & Nemecek study in *Science* (2018)—the largest meta-analysis of food systems covering 38,700 farms across 119 countries—meat and dairy use 83% of farmland while providing only 18% of calories and 37% of protein.
* A shift away from animal agriculture could reduce global agricultural land use by 75%. That’s an area equivalent to the US, China, the EU, and Australia combined.
**What we’re actually subsidizing:**
* Over 80% of EU CAP subsidies support animal products when you include feed production (Nature Food, 2024).
* The livestock sector accounts for 81-86% of EU agricultural greenhouse gas emissions when feed production is included (European Commission study).
**The math:** We’re paying €28-32 billion annually to support a system that converts plant calories into animal calories at a massive loss, uses most of our agricultural land, and generates the majority of agricultural emissions. The same land and subsidies directed toward plant agriculture would produce significantly more food per euro spent.
Whether you approach this from an economic, environmental, or food security angle, the current allocation is difficult to justify on efficiency grounds alone.
And still they are too expensive
if that means I can enjoy meat everyday as I do then I’m fine with it.
Farming subsidies are subsidising foods and drinks that the people paying for the subsidies like to consume.
Stop eating meat omg
Support the meat industry eat vegans.
Tragic.
Biggest waste in the EU
EU subsidizing global warming while posing hard to care about global warming.
It’s 49 cent. €0.49.. (per person per day) for the highest food quality standards in the world.
Europe was on the verge of famine in the 1940’s, now we are a world leader in food production.
You can’t keep everyone happy all the time but the ~500m Europeans who’ve never known hunger don’t know how good they have it.
That’s another part of the problem – whole CAP needs massive reform.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/03/revealed-billionaires-ultimate-beneficiaries-linked-to-eu-farming-subsidies
We need to stop transferring money to billionaires, on one hand.
We need to stop treating CAP as social handout to keep horribly inefficient micro-farms afloat, on the other hand.
We need to accept, that some CAP subsidies are needed to keep robust and diverse agriculture industry based on small and medium (and not micro and giant) farming business, because pretty much no country outside EU has so broad and deep regulations adding costs to everything across the board. Either subsidies or mechanisms similar https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism_en for EVERYTHING.
As a farmer from Lithuania, I believe that a big mistake was made in abolishing the milk quota system in 2015. This only created huge market fluctuations, which created many new problems and did not solve old ones. And most importantly, politicians lost the tool to control and change the market.
So much money turned into polution and waste and given to people who are the source of most of Europe’s problems.
Make “food supply chains” Short Again !
This cannot be a surprise to anyone. Meat and dairy need the most farmland for feeding the animals, and subsidies go to farmland.
I’ll be honest; Politics have soured me against farmers somewhat.
I’ve always *liked* them and appreciated the work they do. But now that bias has been offset by the politics (Brexit, protests against Ukrainian goods, etc) I’m honestly not sure how important it is to have native food security in the modern globalized world.
It is cheaper and more effective to import. The relatively higher wagers and running costs in Europe might make sense in places like France, Belgium, or Scandinavia where who have highly productive & efficient processes/infrastructure to get results. But for the guys who are doing *mostly the same thing* as large food exporters at a higher cost I’m honestly fine just getting the food elsewhere. Especially if the imports conform to our food standards.
It sucks. But places like the UK aren’t doing well enough financially to support everything. Either at the governmental level, or with higher prices in a cost of living crisis.
Food security and local workers are good. But is it **more good** than being able to comfortably afford meals in a low wage bracket, and to properly fund other things?
Without it youd live in a country like the USA where growth hormones and other corner cutting is allowed in animal proccesing, besides that red 40 and other cancerous colorings and additives in drinks, food etc. Even worse would be if you lived in a 3rd world country where regulations barely exist let alone are enforced and you probably wouldnt even have an ingredients list.
Love the coping in the comments. “No, you don’t need to eat meat, it’s bad for the environment, you’ll get cancer, etc”.
I’ve the impression the original animals’ rights advocates were quite sucessful on making people to believe that it was an environmental issue, getting a lot of support for their cause.
Fun fact: In Germany we have a kind word for huge feed-farming-fields agricultural-desert (dt. Agrarwüste)
Change it do it stops supporting big enterprises, and move subsidies to plant based food.
The bubble is strong in the comment section