Europe Talks Sustainability, But Its Trade Policies Say Otherwise

Initiatives like the Green Deal and Farm to Fork promised change, but economic interests keep sustainability on a leash. Recent farmer protests exposed deep flaws in the system, yet the takeaway has been a false dilemma: that green policies and farmers’ livelihoods are incompatible. This myth, recently rejected by the European Commission in the Vision for Agriculture and Food, and long challenged by Slow Food, distracts from the real issue—an economic model that forces farmers into agricultural practices that do not respect planetary boundaries.

Meanwhile, trade deals continue to prioritize corporate chains over food sovereignty and the protection of the environment. The result? Cheap imports, collapsing local markets, and worsening ecological destruction. If the EU truly wants a fair, sustainable food system, it must stop treating food as just another tradable good and start rewriting the rules of global food trade.

The Reality for Farmers: a System that Works Against Them

In the last years, the world has seen multiple protests from farmers across the world. Faced with rising costs, unfair competition, and a market rigged in favor of industrial-scale agribusiness, they took to the streets to demand a livable income. Their anger was justified.

Farmers, whether in Europe or abroad, should be able to produce food that is good for people and nature without being undercut by products that don’t meet those needs. Right now, food trade allows food to compete on price alone, ignoring the true cost to the environment and society. For EU farmers, this means:

• Cheap imports push sustainable farmers out of the market, making responsible farming unviable.
• Price, not quality, determines what’s on our shelves, leaving consumers with food produced under weak environmental standards.
• European agriculture is reliant on subsidies, instead of fair pricing that rewards sustainable production.
• Local and  sustainable farming struggles to survive, while industrial-scale agribusiness thrives.

Citizens deserve access to food that is good for their health, their communities, and the planet. Trade policies should reflect this reality, ensuring that quality, sustainability, and fairness—not just price—shape the future of farming.

Injustice Thrives

The consequences of these policies stretch far beyond European borders.

“Industrial food production, largely practiced in the Global North, is based on highly extractive activities in the Global South, and fuels the climate crisis through heavy pesticide use, large monocultures, huge factory farms”, Slow Food President Edward Mukiibi comments.

In Latin America, the demand for cheap soy to feed European livestock is fueling deforestation at an alarming rate. In Brazil alone, deforestation in the Cerrado surged by 43%, surpassing the Amazon as Brazil’s leading hotspot. At a global level, soy, beef, and palm oil production are responsible for 60% of tropical deforestation. Soy is also responsible for serious land conflict problems. “A study carried out in 2023 shows that at least 500 soy farms overlap with indigenous lands. We are talking about more than 75 thousand hectares of overlap, an area equivalent to countries like Singapore or Bahrain”, Mukiibi deplores.

Meanwhile, African and Asian farmers struggle to compete with subsidized European dairy and grain exports, which undercut local production and trap entire economies in cycles of dependency.

West African countries, for example, have seen their dairy industries suffer as powdered milk—heavily subsidized by the EU—is dumped at prices local farmers cannot match. In Burkina Faso and Senegal, dairy producers who once thrived are now watching their markets collapse. In Ghana, cheap poultry imports from Europe have undercut local chicken prices, making it difficult for smallholder farmers to compete.

At the same time, EU-based agribusinesses continue to profit from exporting pesticides and chemicals banned in Europe to countries of the Global South. In 2022 alone, over 80,000 tons of these hazardous pesticides were shipped to nations where no regulations restrict their use, damaging ecosystems and exposing millions of people to toxic substances known to cause cancer and neurological damage. The hypocrisy is staggering: the same toxic chemicals deemed unhealthy and biodiversity destructive for Europe are poisoning farm workers and nature in the Global South.

Rewriting the Rules of the Game

The good news? We don’t have to accept this system. We can rewrite the rules. That means rethinking what, how, and why we trade food in the first place.

Imagine a trade system that actually prioritizes sustainable farming, fair wages, and ecological health. Instead of flooding Europe with cheap, industrially produced food that undercuts small farmers, we should ensure that all products sold in the EU follow the same environmental rules as those produced locally. European protection of agrobiodiversity could be strengthened as farmers that worked in an agroecological way would not be undermined, further encouraging a wider transition.

So-called “mirror measures”, or import requirements, would be a first step to level the playing field, preventing unfair competition while pushing global agriculture toward more sustainable practices. And instead of supporting harmful trade agreements like the EU-Mercosur deal—which rewards deforestation and unethical labor practices—we should be backing policies that promote regional food systems and agroecology.

Fairer Food Systems Are Possible

Fixing this unfair system requires a fundamental shift in trade policy—one that prioritizes food sovereignty, sustainability, and justice.

Key steps include:

• Implementing “mirror measures”: All imports should meet the same production standards as EU goods, preventing unfair competition and discouraging environmentally destructive farming practices abroad.
• Banning the export of hazardous pesticides: The EU must stop allowing companies to profit from toxic chemicals that are too dangerous for its own ecosystems and citizens.
• Strengthening corporate accountability: Due diligence requirements should ensure that agribusinesses are held responsible for labor abuses and environmental destruction within their supply chains.
• Investing in local and regional food systems: Public procurement policies should prioritize agroecological farming and short supply chains over globalized corporate food networks.

Trade policy is about more than just economics, it is about power, justice, and the kind of world we want to build. The EU has a chance to lead by example, but only if it aligns its trade rules with its climate and social commitments.

The question isn’t whether we can afford to change. It’s whether we can afford not to.