At New York Climate Week in September, opinion leaders voiced concern that high-profile events often gloss over the deep inequalities exposed by climate change, especially how poorer populations suffer disproportionately and struggle to access mitigation or adaptation resources. The message was clear: climate policies should better reflect social justice concerns, ensuring they are inclusive and do not unintentionally favor those already privileged.  We believe access to food sits at the heart of this call for inclusion, because everything starts with food: it is a fundamental human right and a foundation for health, education and opportunity. It is also a lever for climate, economic and social resilience.  > We believe access to food sits at the heart of this call for inclusion, > because everything starts with food This makes the global conversation around food systems transformation more urgent than ever. Food systems are under unprecedented strain. Without urgent, coordinated action, billions of people face heightened risks of malnutrition, displacement and social unrest.   Delivering systemic transformation requires coordinated cross-sector action, not fragmented solutions. Food systems are deeply interconnected, and isolated interventions cannot solve systemic problems. The Food and Agriculture Organization’s recent Transforming Food and Agriculture Through a Systems Approach report calls for systems thinking and collaboration across the value chain to address overlapping food, health and environmental challenges.   Now, with COP30 on the horizon, unified and equitable solutions are needed to benefit entire value chains and communities. This is where a systems approach becomes essential.  A systems approach to transforming food and agriculture  Food systems transformation must serve both people and planet. We must ensure everyone has access to safe, nutritious food while protecting human rights and supporting a just transition.   At Tetra Pak, we support food and beverage companies throughout the journey of food production, from processing raw ingredients like milk and fruit to packaging and distribution. This end-to-end perspective gives us a unique view into the interconnected challenges within the food system, and how an integrated approach can help manufacturers reduce food loss and waste, improve energy and water efficiency, and deliver food where it is needed most.   Meaningful reductions to emissions require expanding the use of renewable and carbon-free energy sources. As outlined in our Food Systems 2040 whitepaper,1 the integration of low-carbon fuels like biofuels and green hydrogen, alongside electrification supported by advanced energy storage technologies, will be critical to driving the transition in factories, farms and food production and processing facilities.   Digitalization also plays a key role. Through advanced automation and data-driven insights, solutions like Tetra Pak® PlantMaster enable food and beverage companies to run fully automated plants with a single point of control for their production, helping them improve operational efficiency, minimize production downtime and reduce their environmental footprint.  The “hidden middle”: A critical gap in food systems policy  Today, much of the focus on transforming food systems is placed on farming and on promoting healthy diets. Both are important, but they risk overlooking the many and varied processes that get food from the farmer to the end consumer. In 2015 Dr Thomas Reardon coined the term the “hidden middle” to describe this midstream segment of global agricultural value chains.2   This hidden middle includes processing, logistics, storage, packaging and handling, and it is pivotal. It accounts for approximately 22 percent of food-based emissions and between 40-60 percent of the total costs and value added in food systems.3 Yet despite its huge economic value, it receives only 2.5 to 4 percent of climate finance.4  Policymakers need to recognize the full journey from farm to fork as a lynchpin priority. Strategic enablers such as packaging that protects perishable food and extends shelf life, along with climate-resilient processing technologies, can maximize yield and minimize loss and waste across the value chain. In addition, they demonstrate how sustainability and competitiveness can go hand in hand.  Alongside this, climate and development finance must be redirected to increase investment in the hidden middle, with a particular focus on small and medium-sized enterprises, which make up most of the sector.   Collaboration in action  Investment is just the start. Change depends on collaboration between stakeholders across the value chain: farmers, food manufacturers, brands, retailers, governments, financiers and civil society.  In practice, a systems approach means joining up actors and incentives at every stage.5 The dairy sector provides a perfect example of the possibilities of connecting. We work with our customers and with development partners to establish dairy hubs in countries around the world. These hubs connect smallholder farmers with local processors, providing chilling infrastructure, veterinary support, training and reliable routes to market.6 This helps drive higher milk quality, more stable incomes and safer nutrition for local communities.  Our strategic partnership with UNIDO* is a powerful example of this collaboration in action. Together, we are scaling Dairy Hub projects in Kenya, building on the success of earlier initiatives with our customer Githunguri Dairy. UNIDO plays a key role in securing donor funding and aligning public-private efforts to expand local dairy production and improve livelihoods. This model demonstrates how collaborations can unlock changes in food systems.  COP30 and beyond  Strategic investment can strengthen local supply chains, extend social protections and open economic opportunity, particularly in vulnerable regions. Lasting progress will require a systems approach, with policymakers helping to mitigate transition costs and backing sustainable business models that build resilience across global food systems for generations to come.   As COP30 approaches, we urge policymakers to consider food systems as part of all decision-making, to prevent unintended trade-offs between climate and nutrition goals. We also recommend that COP30 negotiators ensure the Global Goal on Adaptation include priorities indicators that enable countries to collect, monitor and report data on the adoption of climate-resilient technologies and practices by food processors. This would reinforce the importance of the hidden middle and help unlock targeted adaptation finance across the food value chain.  When every actor plays their part, from policymakers to producers, and from farmers to financiers, the whole system moves forward. Only then can food systems be truly equitable, resilient and sustainable, protecting what matters most: food, people and the planet.  * UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization)  Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Tetra Pak * The ultimate controlling entity is Brands2Life Ltd * The advertisement is linked to policy advocacy regarding food systems and climate policy More information here. https://www.politico.eu/7449678-2

The first 100 days of the new European Commission are behind us and we are seeing that the drive toward competitiveness, resilience, sustainability and growth is real. It will be pivotal that every business, sector and industry stay ahead of the curve when it comes to the development and adoption of emerging technologies, including the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) — a critical catalyst for progress. At PepsiCo, we’ve been leveraging AI for over a decade. From seed to shelf, and from farm to fork, we’ve taken an AI-first approach to fundamentally reshape how PepsiCo plans, makes, moves, sells and delivers our products. It’s been a powerful tool for our ongoing transformation, and we’ll continue to harness the power of AI — using it responsibly to benefit our business, our people and society. > we’ll continue to harness the power of AI — using it responsibly to benefit > our business, our people and society Promoting sustainable agriculture AI is a crucial enabler of productive agriculture. Every bag of Lay’s and Doritos chips or bowl of Quaker oats, begins with high-quality ingredients, grown by one of the tens of thousands of farmers in PepsiCo’s global supply chain. Across the globe we’ve partnered with farmers to capture over a million data points about crop yields, soil health, weather patterns and much more. With machine learning, data can be analyzed to identify improvements that help farmers conserve resources while increasing yields. Via Pepsico This data-driven approach empowers farmers to adopt more intelligent growing practices, driving both sustainable agriculture processes and long-term growth. Optimizing our end-to-end value chain AI has been deeply integrated across our supply chain to help us streamline production, enhance logistics and support proactive maintenance so that our products reach consumers reliably and sustainably. At our Walkers factory in the UK, we’ve implemented AI-powered sensors that monitor our machinery and equipment in real-time. By using advanced sound-based diagnostics, we’re able to decrease unplanned downtime. This allows us to deliver our products reliably and ensures our mechanics can focus on planned maintenance rather than reactive repair. Leveraging AI also enables more seamless and sustainable deliveries. We’re able to analyze traffic patterns, weather conditions and delivery schedules to quickly identify the most efficient routes for transportation. This reduces costs and minimizes the carbon footprint of our distribution network.  Empowering our workforce These are powerful examples of how AI technology complements the work and day-to-day lives of our talented teams. Our guiding principle is that AI must work hand-in-hand with human ingenuity, enhancing productivity and freeing our employees to have more time to think critically and creatively. Starting my career in academia impressed upon me the importance of remaining curious. To me, curiosity is the birthplace of creativity, which is why it’s essential to me that our people remain curious and that we provide them with opportunities to develop their skills and careers. For these reasons, we make it a priority to foster a culture of continuous learning at PepsiCo, where everyone can thrive. > Our guiding principle is that AI must work hand-in-hand with human ingenuity, > enhancing productivity and freeing our employees to have more time to think > critically and creatively. The Act highlights the importance of AI literacy, reinforcing the need for organizations to equip their employees with the knowledge and skills to leverage AI effectively. PepsiCo is already driving AI literacy internally, ensuring that our teams are ready to work alongside AI systems safely and responsibly. At PepsiCo we’re ensuring our employees are fluent in data and understand how the technologies we’re implementing work for them. This means reimagining workplace training for greater impact: PepsiCo’s Digital Academy offers more than 50,000 learning modules, covering everything from machine learning to cloud computing. And of course, it also leverages AI to deliver personalized training courses and degrees based on everyone’s role and experience.  As we continue to integrate AI into PepsiCo’s digital transformation, we recognize that it comes with some risks and are committed to deploying AI ethically and transparently. Our Responsible AI Framework is a rigorous governance process that ensures our use of AI is deployed in a way that is ethical, equitable and transparent. This commitment aligns with the principles of the EU AI Act, which emphasizes responsible AI deployment, governance and workforce upskilling. > As we continue to integrate AI into PepsiCo’s digital transformation, we > recognize that it comes with some risks and are committed to deploying AI > ethically and transparently. Looking ahead I believe it’s vital that every business adopts a proactive approach to upskilling its workforce to ensure that no one is left behind. As I travel across Europe to meet our teams, partners and stakeholders, it is encouraging to see the shared vision of how democratizing AI is key to achieving our shared goals — whether feeding the world sustainably or driving down emissions. Athina Kanioura As we continue to scale AI across PepsiCo, I believe we’re setting an example that others can follow when it comes to private-sector investment in this critical form of technology. We are eager to collaborate with the Commission and other stakeholders to unlock solutions that are practical, scalable, innovative and transformative, driving lasting impact for the communities we serve. I invite you to reach out and work with us to ensure the EU leads in the AI revolution.

Ursula von der Leyen is rounding out the first 100 days of her second term in office — and what a whirlwind it’s been. Since the European Commission president won a second mandate, Donald Trump’s return to the White House in the United States has upended the transatlantic relationship, calling into question the existence of NATO as well as U.S. support for Ukraine in its defensive war against Russia. The pressure coming from Washington — which has threatened the EU with 25 percent tariffs and warned it may not defend countries that fail to spend enough on defense — has forced the Commission to speed up work on reforms designed to bolster the bloc’s defenses and make it more competitive on the global stage.  “On all these issues, the direction of travel was always clear,” von der Leyen told a press conference on Sunday. “What has changed is the sense of urgency. Something fundamental has shifted.” Indeed, among the key reforms von der Leyen’s Commission is due to present this month is a so-called “White Paper” on defense that’s meant to spell out options on how Europe can finance a major defense rampup.  But Trump’s moves on Ukraine, as well as his threats not to defend countries that don’t spend enough on defense, have moved that timeline forward, with EU leaders endorsing plans to spend €800 billion in the coming years during an emergency meeting in Brussels last week — front-running the White Paper. In addition to defense, the European Commission president laid out a series of promises for the EU’s executive body to fulfill in the first 100 days of its term. But that was before Trump was elected and halted aid to Ukraine, threatened the EU with sweeping tariffs, and threw the established world order into doubt. The pressure coming from Washington has forced the Commission to speed up work on reforms designed to bolster the bloc’s defenses and make it more competitive on the global stage. | Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images So, how have von der Leyen’s promises held up? Here’s POLITICO’s verdict. 1. CLEAN INDUSTRIAL DEAL What von der Leyen said: “There is an equally urgent need to decarbonize and industrialize our economy at the same time,” von der Leyen wrote in her second-term manifesto. Her solution: A “Clean Industrial Deal” that would revive the EU’s struggling, heavy-polluting industries — think steel or cement — while reducing their carbon footprint, and also boost manufacturers of new climate-friendly technologies such as electric heat pumps.  Did she hit her target? The Clean Industrial Deal arrived on Feb. 26 (day 88) and responded to many of industry’s demands. The strategy outlined steps to reduce energy prices, source raw materials and create demand for low-carbon products. It was more wobbly on financing — with a new $100 billion fund mainly drawing from existing or already earmarked cash and betting on governments volunteering more money — and addressing trade pressures.  Meanwhile, although the Commission was also eager to roll back green regulations, its promised 2040 climate target — which green groups, clean-tech firms and EU countries like Denmark wanted to incorporate within the Clean Industrial Deal — has still not been published.  Where will the EU go next? The Clean Industrial Deal will unfold over the coming years with more than two dozen legislative proposals, legal reforms and sector-specific “action plans.” The big items for this year include a reformed state-aid framework coming in summer — meant to deliver on some of the investment and energy price promises — and an “Industrial Decarbonization Accelerator Act” toward the end of the year that will establish a label for low-carbon products and made-in-EU green requirements for government spending. And that 2040 target should come soon as well.  Score: — By Zia Weise 2. EUROPEAN ACTION PLAN ON THE CYBERSECURITY OF HOSPITALS AND HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS What von der Leyen said: Europe “must do more” to protect its health-care system from an ever-increasing barrage of cyberattacks, which can knock out vital systems or lock doctors and nurses out of sensitive patient data until criminals get a ransom. The EU’s answer? Ramped-up technical support, an early-warning system and rapid response teams. Did she hit her target? Sort of. The EU published its plan on Jan. 15 (day 46), which got a reasonably warm response. There was, however, one big caveat: It all depends on money, and the plan made little mention of that — even though cash remains “the most important issue,” according to Tomislav Sokol, a Croatian member of the European Parliament with the center-right European People’s Party group, in comments made when the plan was published.  Digitaleurope, a trade body, reckons the plan is a “good starting point” but echoed concerns about a lack of clarity on cash.  Where will the EU go next? The technical: The Commission will now consult on the plan, with various deadlines to hit throughout this year and next. The political: The cash question is for EU capitals to address, said Health Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi when unveiling the plan. “I understand that this is a problem across the board in Europe, that there’s not enough resources dedicated to [protecting data]. But we’re making the point with this proposal that there would have to be,” he said. The success of the plan “will, of course, depend on the support from the European member states,” said Wim Hafkamp, managing director at Z-Cert, the Dutch computer emergency response team for the health sector.  Score: — By Sam Clark 3. AI FACTORIES INITIATIVE What von der Leyen said: Von der Leyen pledged to ensure European startups had access to the necessary computing power to compete in the accelerating global artificial intelligence race by “building” massive AI supercomputers, also known as AI factories. With many European startups currently relying on U.S. computing power, the move could also be read as a push to become more technologically sovereign.  Did she hit her target? Kind of. On Dec. 11 (day 11), the European Commission announced it would contribute half of a planned €1.5 billion investment into seven European sites. But the victory was short-lived: U.S. President Donald Trump assumed office in January and announced a $500 billion AI hardware plan, moving the goalposts somewhat.  So the Commission moved again. On Feb. 10, at the AI Action Summit in Paris, von der Leyen unveiled a plan to mobilize €200 billion for hardware, including a €20 billion fund to build four AI gigafactories aimed at training the most complex AI models.  Where will the EU go next? On this one we’re only getting started. The Commission is expected to grant funding to five more AI factories in March. The road to the gigafactories is even longer: There’s no clear breakdown on how much funding will be provided, nor any details on how much of that will come from the EU budget.  Score: — By Pieter Haeck 4. WHITE PAPER ON DEFENSE What von der Leyen said: In her political guidelines the Commission president said she would present a White Paper on the Future of European Defence to identify investment needs. In the past months the Commission made clear that the policy document would also include financing options to help the bloc massively boost defense spending.  Did she hit her target? Yes and no. Von der Leyen technically hasn’t presented her White Paper yet, with publication slated for March 19 (day 109).  However, on March 4 (day 91) she did present a plan to send loans of up to €150 billion to governments to help them increase their military expenditure. The money can be spent on artillery, missiles, ammunition, drones and anti-drone systems, as well as on weapons for Ukraine.  Von der Leyen also said she would trigger the EU’s national escape clause, a mechanism to prevent defense spending from being included in the punishment mechanism for countries breaching the bloc’s deficit rules.  Her plans were approved by EU leaders on March 6.  Where will the EU go next? The Commission now has to translate the financing proposals into actual legislative instruments.  The EU’s executive branch is also still expected to present the White Paper on Defense, which could include more financing options, as well as more details on the EU’s industrial priorities for armament.  Score: — By Laura Kayali 5. VISION FOR AGRICULTURE AND FOOD What von der Leyen said: Von der Leyen pledged to present a Vision for Agriculture and Food, building on an agrifood roundtable held during the first half of last year. “We need to overcome contradictions … that’s why the strategic dialogue on the future of farming has begun,” she told lawmakers in July. “I’ve promised to listen carefully and to draw important lessons.” Did she hit her target? On Feb. 19 (day 81), Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen delivered an underwhelming vision that tried to please everybody with better conditions for farmers, fairer supply chains and a rethinking of sustainability policies. But for many, this big, fancy vision — which is to replace the previous Farm to Fork Strategy — has landed more as a farmer-friendly agenda that’s big on promises but short on cash. Where will the EU go next? The Commission is expected to move forward with the first part of the plan in April: to cut red tape on the €300 billion-plus farm budget by easing requirements to access the cash. By the end of the year, Hansen wants to crack down on other rules affecting farmers beyond the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) — such as environmental and food safety policies. Score: — By Paula Andrés 6. YOUTH POLICY DIALOGUES What von der Leyen said: In her guidelines von der Leyen said young people should be able to use their voices and shape their futures. She also said she wanted her commissioners to lead by example and to engage in “youth policy dialogues” within the first 100 days.  Did she hit her target? Yes, albeit narrowly. Sixteen of the 28 commissioners held their youth policy dialogues the week before the deadline (days 93-97), while three commissioners are set to hold dialogues on March 10 (day 100): justice chief Michael McGrath, tech sovereignty boss Henna Virkkunen and innovation lead Ekaterina Zaharieva. Deadline work resonates well with young people.  Where will the EU go next? The youth policy dialogues are meant to be a recurring event in which commissioners talk to young people once a year. The bigger question is how — or if — this will feed the Commission’s policy work.  Youth Commissioner Glenn Micallef, who played wheelchair basketball during his dialogue in Athens, told POLITICO that the experience of wheelchair sports is “a whole new dimension” compared to just reading up on inclusive sports.  Score: — By Pieter Haeck 7. ENLARGEMENT POLICY REVIEW What von der Leyen said: Outlining priorities several months ago, von der Leyen zeroed in on enlargement — expanding the bloc’s membership — as well as the need to tweak the EU’s rules to make space for new members. Paris and Berlin have both argued that if the EU is grow to as many as 30 or 35 members it will need to change rules on agricultural aid, for instance, to ensure that existing members aren’t penalized. This gave rise to von der Leyen’s call for an in-depth “policy review” examining all aspects of enlargement. In a foretaste of this intricate process — potentially including changes to the EU’s basic treaties — a preparatory document published in July was 22 pages long. Did she hit her target? Insofar as a document will be published, yes. That’s what the Commission does. But this is one case where the savage geopolitics of the day is likely to derail the EU’s natural bureaucratic pace.   Where will the EU go next? Von der Leyen has already flagged that Ukraine could join the bloc by 2030, possibly earlier. Her enlargement commissioner, Marta Kos, has floated the possibility of giving Ukraine faster access to parts of the EU’s single market as part of an accelerated accession process. “We are also working on plans to accelerate the integration of Ukraine into many more parts of the Single Market — to attract more investments, to strengthen Europe-wide value chains, and to create new opportunities for both Ukrainian and European businesses,” Kos said last week. Naturally, all this happened before the policy review was published. Score: — By Nicholas Vinocur

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Pasta, pizza, and Parmigiano — delicious? Absolutely. But in 2025, they’re also deeply political. This week on EU Confidential, host Sarah Wheaton digs into how food has become a battleground, with POLITICO agriculture reporter Alessandro Ford explaining how Italy’s far-right — and politicians across Europe — are using the Mediterranean diet to push back against Brussels. From Nutri-Score to climate policies, we unpack the rise of gastro-nationalism and how a diet once rooted in simplicity is now fueling a political fight. We also have another installment of our Berlaymont Who’s Who series: Sarah sits down with POLITICO tech reporter Pieter Haeck to discuss Henna Virkkunen, the European Commissioner for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy. With online election meddling on the rise and Elon Musk challenging EU regulations, Virkkunen is in charge of enforcing the Digital Services Act — but does Brussels have the resolve to keep Big Tech in check? Further reading: The Mediterranean diet is a lie, by Alessandro Ford.

BRUSSELS — It’s Christophe Hansen’s first working day in his new job, and he is sitting nervously by his temporary desk in the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Agriculture with some well-prepared talking points.  The new European Union agriculture and food chief — a farmer’s son who hails from Luxembourg, and from Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s European People’s Party — tells POLITICO he has a clear goal: to help farmers have a better life. Five years ago, von der Leyen’s first Commission unveiled the flagship Farm to Fork Strategy, an overarching vision “at the heart of the European Green Deal” to green agriculture and food systems.  The strategy included targets to reduce pesticide use; new animal welfare rules; and a nutrition labeling scheme — which were either abandoned or never implemented after a backlash from parties on the right of the political spectrum and Europe’s powerful farming lobbies.  At the beginning of his mandate, and with farmers’ protests still raging in parts of Europe, Hansen pleaded for a “different” approach that will be revealed in a new Vision for Agriculture and Food that von der Leyen has tasked him with delivering within his first 100 days in office. “Farmers had the impression that it [Farm to Fork] was a top-down imposition,” he said on Monday in his first interview as commissioner in Brussels. In addition, Hansen prefers to speak about objectives and aspirations than about targets. “I’m not a big fan of putting down percentages.” At the same time, there seems to be little room for agri-food systems — which still account for about one-third of total EU greenhouse gas emissions and are a major contributor to water pollution and biodiversity decline — to slow down their green transition. “We have to continue our path toward sustainable farming and food systems,” said Hansen, a former member of the European Parliament who sat on its environment committee. “But I want to achieve those objectives with the farmers, and with the actors of the food chain, together.”  Hansen, 42, insisted that instead of telling farmers “this is the percentage, eat it or die, let’s [tell them] we want to reduce pesticides; what are the means needed to get there?” A NEW LOBBY IS BORN To achieve that consensus, the commissioner will announce a call for applications for a new consultative body made up of 30 farming, food supply chain and civil society representatives — the European Board on Agri-Food — by the end of the week. The board would build on the work of the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture, a similar but time-limited exercise convened by von der Leyen that presented a final report with agreed policy recommendations in September. The mandate of the EBAF will last five years, and its members would meet up to six times a year. Hansen will chair its meetings, which aim to provide advice on policy initiatives — including his 100-day vision. A first get-together will likely happen before the initiative is presented on Feb. 19. Even before the new Commission was announced, Copa-Cogeca — the EU’s largest farming lobby — demanded greater representation in the bloc’s newest policy forum. | Hatim Kaghat/Belga Mag/AFP via Getty Images The new group “will not have a legislative role [nor] replace the co-legislators,” Hansen explained. He sees it as “an opportunity to confront the board with certain political ideas and pathways to make sure that afterward everybody is firstly, informed, and secondly, in line with the political decisions that are going to follow them.” “It will require a lot of work,” he admitted. Even before the new Commission was announced, Copa-Cogeca — the EU’s largest farming lobby — demanded greater representation in the bloc’s newest policy forum. “In the Strategic Dialogue, just five out of 29 participants were farmers,” Copa-Cogeca wrote in a Sept. 20 letter to the Commission. “At least half of the Board should be composed of participants representing the farming world, and Copa and Cogeca … should be granted a stronger presence in comparison to other actors.” Hansen seemed to be on board with that. “It will be very important not to disadvantage the farming community because we are speaking about their future,” he said, adding that farmers are more affected than others by the issues to be discussed. “This criteria needs to be taken into account” when selecting members, he concluded. The final decision will be taken by the College of Commissioners. EVOLUTION, NOT REVOLUTION A major hurdle for the first half of Hansen’s mandate will be repurposing the EU’s €300 billion farm budget, the Common Agricultural Policy. It is mostly distributed in the form of direct subsidy payments based on farmed area — meaning that farmers with more land get more money than those with less. While many hope that the next cycle of the CAP starting in 2028 will be a defining chance to make EU farm policy more just and sustainable, Hansen called for an evolutionary approach: “The focus should be to make things better, not make a revolution.” Giving “predictability and stability” to farmers was of utmost importance, he said, and therefore, “Predictability is not changing everything that is functioning for the last six years, I think that would be the wrong way.” One of the “evolutions” that Hansen is eyeing is to make area payments degressive — meaning that payouts per hectare would decrease gradually once a certain farm size is reached. As a negotiator on the file when he was on the Parliament’s environment committee, Hansen is confident of support from MEPs — although EU capitals may need convincing. “The Parliament was very clear on that line,” he said, “but we knew that last time the Council was reluctant, [and] that is why it became voluntary.” At the beginning of his mandate, and with farmers’ protests still raging in parts of Europe, Christophe Hansen pleaded for a “different” approach that will be revealed in a new Vision for Agriculture and Food. | Guillaume Horcajuelo/EPA-EFE On the other hand, he added, “We can’t compare the size of a farm from one country to another.” But much will depend first on negotiations on the EU next multiyear budget. As much as the agriculture commissioners’ job is to maintain the share of money going to farmers, the EU’s obsession with competitiveness and growing demands to fund other sectors such as defense will likely take a toll on the CAP. “Agriculture and food production is a strategic sector for the EU, and it would be very unwise to give away this potential that we have,” Hansen warned, while adding, “We will not have more money in the pot, that is something we need to acknowledge.”

BRUSSELS — When Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented the conclusions of her Strategic Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture last month, it looked like a PR coup. The seven-month forum on agri-food policy had calmed both riotous farmers and outraged NGOs, while yielding an apparently balanced report that she could loot for legislative ideas. Yet that success may be short-lived. Copa-Cogeca — Europe’s largest and most influential agricultural lobby — is hardening its position, POLITICO has learned. The group’s national members were outraged by some of the dialogue’s final recommendations, particularly the need to promote plant-based diets. After a raucous month in which members repeatedly blasted the Copa-Cogeca presidency — at a farm event in Hungary, in emails to its Brussels office and at the Copa presidium on Sept. 26 — the umbrella group wants to beef up its bargaining power at the European Board on Agri-Food (EBAF), the proposed successor to the Strategic Dialogue. “In the Strategic Dialogue, just five out of 29 participants were farmers,” Copa-Cogeca wrote in a Sept. 20 letter to the Commission, obtained by POLITICO. “At least half of the Board should be composed of participants representing the farming world, and Copa and Cogeca … should be granted a stronger presence in comparison to other actors.” The group also called for the inclusion of bodies representing “livestock and crops sectorial organisations, inputs [and] agriculture machinery,” as well as a shift from the fast-paced, confidential and person-to-person talks towards a slower, more transparent, and organization-based format.  “What we really need to focus on is making it work for farmers because that, from my point of view, was the initial objective of the dialogue: it was a reaction to farmers’ protest,” said Jan Doležal, the president of the Czech AKČR agrarian chamber. Looking forward, “we’ll work to improve our negotiation position,” he told POLITICO. That’s going to be a problem as von der Leyen seeks to convert the conclusions of the dialogue into a “Vision” for the future of EU agriculture — one of several action plans she has promised to deliver within 100 days of her new Commission being sworn in. The 29-stakeholder dialogue sought to overcome the extreme polarization of von der Leyen’s first term, encouraging compromise and trust between a motley crew of agricultural associations, food manufacturers and retailers, environmentalists, academics, and financiers. Participants mostly came alone, ate together, and shared stories about themselves and their families. Stacking the EBAF with farmers will likely be seen as a unilateral power grab, breaking the tentative cease-fire and tipping Europe’s agri-food sector into turbulence once more. Likewise, converting the nimble talks into rigid meetings, where envoys run every suggestion through their bulky membership lists, will kill the goose that laid the golden egg.  Factor in grumpy European lawmakers and capitals, both upset at being excluded from the process, and the results of von der Leyen’s unorthodox farm talks could end up having a short shelf life. MEXICAN STANDOFF IN BRUSSELS Since its announcement in January, the Strategic Dialogue had ticked along nicely. With its members sworn to secrecy, it was hard to gauge how things were going, but everyone seemed reasonably satisfied. There were no major leaks and participants praised the constructive atmosphere and optimistic outlooks.   By late August, negotiations had entered the final phase and people started to sweat. The dialogue’s conclusions were meant to be unanimous and Peter Strohschneider, the German historian who moderated the debate, began to apply pressure to reluctant delegates. He told one group of holdouts that he would keep on chairing meetings for as long as it took, recalled one participant. When Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented the conclusions of her Strategic Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture last month, it looked like a PR coup. | Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images When the 100-page report was published on Sept. 4, everyone scrambled to claim victory. NGOs trumpeted how it supported the EU’s recently-adopted nature restoration law. Consumer groups celebrated its food labeling and fair pricing sections. Young, organic and smallholder farmers highlighted the bits on reforming the EU farm budget, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Copa-Cogeca, the traditional behemoth of Brussels agri-food, struggled to sell it across the bloc though. “Really dangerous” is how Coldiretti, Italy’s largest farmer union, judged the recommendation for the CAP to prioritize smaller farmers. “I don’t like that at all,” said the head of the Dutch LTO on the need to decarbonize diets. Overall, the text “falls well short of expectations,” sniffed the president of the German Farmers’ Association (DBV). France’s FNSEA remained silent. Neither the organization nor its outspoken president, Arnaud Rousseau, posted a word about the report on its website or X account. That was despite the fact its former president is Christiane Lambert, one of the three Copa-Cogeca leaders who signed the conclusions and who uploaded a mass of posts about it on social media.  That week, most Copa member representatives were in Budapest for a farm conference. “This was our first chance to discuss it together,” said one participant, granted anonymity to speak freely. “There was unhappiness at part of it, particularly in relation to diets and consideration of alternative diets and plant proteins … anything essentially that would go against our position on livestock.” Two days after the report’s publication, four Copa members from the Visegrad countries — Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary — shot a highly critical letter at the secretariat. It demanded Copa-Cogeca retrospectively reject the report’s conclusions and withdraw from the Strategic Dialogue entirely.  “After 20 years of membership of the European Union and of the Copa-Cogeca family, we thought that our differences would be understood and safeguarded,” the four wrote in the letter obtained by POLITICO. “We expected the Copa-Cogeca Secretariat and Presidents to take a more cautious position and to insist on discussing the very sensitive and often controversial conclusions” with members, they complained: “The process was very non-transparent, especially in the last three days of the negotiations, when we had zero opportunity to intervene.” The group’s leadership tried to smooth things over. At the Copa presidium on Sept. 26, they assured unions the document was just a starting point. Some were assuaged. “I think people have accepted it with caveats, people are willing to move on,” said the participant present in Budapest.    Others were not. POLITICO spoke to one attendee who argued the lobby showed a lack of courage during the dialogue and its endorsement is not easily reversible. Von der Leyen wants the report to guide future legislation and has explicitly tasked her designated agriculture commissioner, Christophe Hansen, with following up on its proposals. WHAT HAPPENS NOW There’s disagreement over whether Copa-Cogeca could still withdraw from future talks. In a statement to POLITICO, the secretariat said that “the Strategic Dialogue is a report, not a legally binding agreement, so the question of a general withdrawal doesn’t apply.”  Both Doležal, the Czech farm boss, and the representative present in Budapest agreed with that idea, though for different reasons. Doležal, one of the four signatories of the Visegrad letter, told POLITICO that “I don’t think this will be on the table actually,” since Copa-Cogeca’s subsequent letter to the Commission has appeased him. The representative from Budapest was more pragmatic. “We’ve got a new secretary-general, Ellie Tsiforou: I don’t think it will be in her interests after her first couple of weeks … to announce that the farmers are” out, and risk immediately alienating von der Leyen, they reflected.  The dialogue’s conclusions were meant to be unanimous and Peter Strohschneider began to apply pressure to reluctant delegates. | Nicolas Tucat Not everyone got the memo though.  Any breach of the principle of consensus — such as signing a trade deal with South America or proposing a new pesticide reduction law — would mean trouble, warned José María Castilla, the head of Spain’s largest farmer union Asaja. “If [the EU] doesn’t comply with the agreement, we will be back on the streets,” he told POLITICO.