Sustainable livestock production EU40 debate at the EP

Transcription

1 Sustainable livestock production EU40 debate at the EP Luis Carazo Jiménez Head of unit "Animal products" DG AGRI

2 The three pillars of sustainability in EU livestock production Whereas all the three are equally important in securing sustainability, the tools within the CAP to underpin each one of them differ: Environmental dimension: mainly through legislation, cross-compliance and incentives. Social dimension: mainly through Rural Development policies with a strong focus on rural communities. Economic dimension: income support and market management measures (volatility).

3 Role of the EU sustainable livestock sector in meeting the growing world demand Predictions rarely materialise but if for once they do?? Demand for food in rich countries is mature and the competition here is about gaining value. The growth in volumes will occur in not-yet-so-rich countries. The EU has a role to play as a key supplier of safe (high standards) and tasteful (tradition/reputation) food produced in line with high environmental standards. But more exposure to international markets entails as well higher risks of price oscillation.

4 A single magic answer? Can a single driver (e.g. innovation) make the trick? Certainly not. Solutions are multi-factorial. So what is needed? The proper stewardship of our natural resources, professional farmers, a better functioning of the chain, a committed food industry and a permanent dialogue with consumers. And, of course, innovation at every stage is also part of the answer. Anything else? Yes, a policy that accompanies this development.

5 How can the CAP help? The environmental and social challenges being evident (and hence their political responses) let's focus on the ever-changing economic dimension of sustainable livestock production: Income support: direct payments and others Price stability (safety net, exceptional market measures) Food chain: milk package, AMTF Trade issues: gaining access to new outlets

6 Future issues The rational use of our (limited) natural resources will remain the baseline. Ethical issues around the consumption of animal products will evolve and expand, not only in richer countries. The same applies to nutritional/health aspects. Production methods and animal welfare issues will increasingly shape the agenda. Climate change of particular relevance (not only as a source but also because of its sequestration role grasslands-)

7 Sustainable livestock production Balancing focus between food security and consumer concerns Nan-Dirk Mulder, Brussels 30 November 2016

8 The global food supply challenge: feeding the world with limited resources 35% 30% 25% 20% Global outlook 2025: 21% more AP +13% more vegetable crops +21% more animal protein +20% more biofuels 65% of meat/egg demand growth is in Asia 1,000 tonnes 30,000 First tier: 64% Second tier: 18% 20,000 10, ,000 Rest:: 18% 15% Pork Beef Poultry Eggs 10% Asia has limited available resources 5% 0% Wheat Maize Rice Soybean Sugar Beef Pork Poultry Eggs Fish Dairy Ethanol Biodiesel ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Vegetable crops Animal Protein Biofuels Acre per capita Water availability per capita Source: Rabobank forecast based on FAO, USDA and local statistics, 2016 Source: Rabobank forecast based on FAO, USDA and local statistics, 2016

9 How to feed the world? Feeding the world: A multisector challenge Meat demand Food demand Fuel demand Meat supply Food supply Fuel supply Livestock/poultry supply Grains and oilseed supply Land use +20% in 10 years Expansion Efficiency Yield Efficiency Cultivation Yield Limited Cost price differences in animal protein Egg Chicken Pangasius Pork Shrimp Beef (finishing) Salmon Grain surplus countries: 40% cheaper EURcts/kg % Source: Rabobank analysis, 2010 Source: Rabobank analysis, 2016 Source: Rabobank analysis based on AVEC, LEI 2016

10 Consumer demand for protein: Differences between regions Income growth and changing consumer demand with strong link to changing consumer concerns ECONOMIC TAKE-OFF Food as a need INCOME < $5,000 Time free ECONOMIC REINVENTION Food as stimulation Income >$40,000 Food security Food safety Location bound Location free Animal welfare friendly Animal health Environmental friendly ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Food as a social occasion Income: $5000- $15,000 Time bound ECONOMIC CONSOLIDATION Food as nutrition/well-being Income: $15,000 -$40,000 Source: Rabobank analysis, 2016 Source: Rabobank analysis, 2016

11 EU s leadership in standards but is there a level playing field? 100% 90% 80% 70% EU Egg sector cage ban: EUR 5 billion investment to change 2012 EU cage ban Cost price differences production systems Cost index: Cage 550 cm2 = % 50% 40% EU egg and egg products imports from Ukraine X 1,000 tonnes 8,000 Source: Rabobank analysis based on LEI data, % 6,000 20% 10% 4,000 0% Cage Enriched cage Barn Free range Organic 2, M Source: Rabobank analysis based on Eurostat data, 2016 Source: Rabobank analysis based on Eurostat data, 2016

12 The chicken example: higher costs and early adaptor cost disadvantage Additional costs EU poultry producers against non EU producers due to regulations 96 Cost price differences enriched vs conventional cages % additional costs Density GMO Growth promotors Meat and bone meal Salmonella control Ammonia emission N directive Production cost base Extra cost regulations Early adaptors Late adaptors Source: Rabobank analysis based on LEI data, 2016 Source: Rabobank analysis based on LEI data, 2016

13 Consumer concerns to become a more global issue and client driven Canada: ban on pig gestation NL: Chicken of tomorrow EU: 2012 Cage ban 2013 sow house ban Alberta: Phase out of battery cages D: Germany Initiative Tierwohl US EU Antibiotics China: Antibiotics, melamine scandals Client based push to non cage eggs California Jan 2015 cage ban Brazil discussion about cage ban ACT, WA: Bans on cage houses and sow stalls Source: Rabobank, 2016

14 EU chicken industry s changing market focus Expansion of chicken concepts in Europe: now 7% of the market Concepts Drivers EUR/ 100 kg 250 Cost price differences concepts Industry % NGOs % +30% +41% 100 Retail 50 Consumer 0 Regular Slower growing Extensive indoor Extensive outdoor Organic Source: Rabobank analysis, 2016 Source: Rabobank analysis based on LEI data, 2016

15 Key factors for global competitiveness in meat markets EU meat trade Drivers for being competitive X 1,000 tonnes 2,500 2,000 1,500 Cost of production Differences in preference 1, ,000 Avg. P: EUR 1.80 Avg. P: EUR 1.35 Avg. P: EUR 2.45 Internationalisation Trader skills and network Access to global markets Source: Rabobank analysis based on EUROSTAT data, 2016 Source: Rabobank analysis, 2016

16 How to enhance EU competitive positon? How to enhance competitive positon? Credibility opinion makers in Germany Global meat trade: cost of production is key Independent experts Affected Strong global market access strengthens market potential NGOs Scientists Promotion budgets: internal and external EU Journalists Business LEVEL PLAYING FIELD: Same standards for imported meat and eggs as for EU producers Politicians 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Source: Rabobank analysis, 2016 Source: Rabobank analysis, 2016

17 Conclusions The customer is key: The biggest part of EU and global markets are price driven and cost of production is key. Addressing consumer concerns becomes from beside from a social perspective also from a market perspective more relevant EU s global competitive positon under pressure - Higher costs due regulations - Early adaptor cost disadvantages Consumer concern driven changes come from two sources: - Government related regulation - Market driven change (partly via NGOs) EU can support industry - Cost and technology improvements - Global level playing field - Better market access - Promotion budgets for internal and external market

18 Thanks for your attention Questions?

19 Public attitudes towards sustainable intensification of animal production systems Building trust through effective communication Professor Lynn J. Frewer

20 Increased global demand

21 Consumer concerns and communication issues? Food insecurity High level of resource required to produce meat relative to plant based foods Health risks from high levels of meat consumption Dietary recommendations Animal welfare concerns Integrated into sustainable intensification? Human health Zoonoses, antimicrobial resistance

22 Consumer s willingness to pay for improved farm animal welfare (results of a global metanalysis)

23 Meta-analysis -Thematic analysis results Consumers mostly view modern production systems negatively and voice a number of concerns Naturalness and humane treatment were central to this Consumer concerns were also motivated by human health e.g. The use of antibiotics and impacts on human health Consumers associated higher welfare/ animal friendly products with improved product quality, safety and healthiness Support the use of legislative and market based solutions for improving farm animal welfare Clark B, Stewart GB, Panzone LA, Kyriazakis I, Frewer LJ. (2016). A systematic review of public attitudes, perceptions and behaviours towards production diseases associated with farm animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics, 29(3), pp

24 Results Consumer attitudes towards genetically modified animals and plants for food production Plant-related applications were more acceptable than animal-related applications. Risk perceptions (associated with both plants and animals) were greater in Europe than North America and Asia. Benefit perceptions were greater in North America and Asia than Europe. Moral concerns higher in North America and Asia compared to Europe Risk and benefit perceptions increased with time everywhere Frewer, L. J., van der Lans, I. A., Fischer, A. R., Reinders, M. J., Menozzi, D., Zhang, X., & Zimmermann, K. L. (2013). Public perceptions of agri-food applications of genetic modification a systematic review and meta-analysis. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 30(2),

25 Genomics Potentially avoids many of the disadvantages and negative consumer perceptions associated with GM Is likely to prove a more publicly acceptable route than GM for the development of healthier and more productive animals. All Stakeholders in the food chain need A better understanding of ethical issues that apply to their own area of activity and awareness of those affecting other stakeholders An approach to the moral status of the animals involved that finds credibility and acceptability with civil society

26 Conclusions Effective communication about the relevant issues associated with animal production systems Communication MUST address consumer concerns Animal welfare Production diseases Risk, benefits and ethical concerns associated with new animal technologies Human health Antibiotic resistance or Avian influenza are transboundary risks Healthy diets and moderate meat consumption Sustainable intensification to ensure food security

27 Thank you!

28 The Ethical Matrix for applications of genomics in animal production systems Beneficence Non-Malfeasance Fairness / Justice Autonomy Producer organism Improved health and welfare e.g. Animal welfare and gene pool issues Adequate regulation to ensure animal welfare Behavioural freedom and respect for telos* Primary Producer Economic gain & more efficient farming practices No economic loss. Avoid strains that reduce animal welfare Level field for competition and trade and ability to choose supplier Evidence-based freedom of choice re new genomic strains Manufacturer / distributor Consumer Economic gain & better reliability and quantity of supply Better quality food and health benefits at reasonable cost Not using supplies that might have resulted in harm to animals or the environment No cause for fear of unknown risks or harm to health Clear and consistent regulatory framework Universal affordability of food. Adequate labelling to enable personal choice Awareness of characteristics of selected genomes Enough information to make judgement on naturalness of product or processes Biota Replenishing stocks, waste disposal No harm or depletion Sustainability of populations and ecology Respect strains & system/ecosystem interaction *allowing an organism to express its nature (which it possesses as a member of it s species) Coles, D., Frewer, L. J., & Goddard, E. (2015). Ethical Issues and Potential Stakeholder Priorities Associated with the Application of Genomic Technologies Applied to Animal Production Systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 1-23.

29 Using an Ethical Matrix to assess governance and policy An ethical matrix can be used as a tool for identifying and discussing ethical aspects of food production. Food production has an impact on: The organism used for production The producer (e.g. manufacturer or farmer) The consumer The biota (other living things and the environment) For each of the above the ethical matrix is used to assess the impact on them in terms of: Autonomy (dignity/identity) Beneficence (to do good) Non-malfeasance (to do no harm) Justice (Fairness) Mepham, B. (2000). A framework for the ethical analysis of novel foods: The ethical matrix. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12(2), also Kaiser et al (2007) Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Vol. 20 No.1, 65-80, DOI: /s

30 Meta-analysis results Western and Southern Europe had a higher WTP than Northern Europe Consumers had a higher WTP than all citizens (both were positive). Multivariate analysis confirms these results, although only income remains significant with the addition of further variables Socio-demographic characteristics explain the most variability in the data, although heterogeneity remains high at over 80% WTP appears to decrease with age women are likely to pay more than men Those with a higher income and higher education are also WTP more

31 Coping with market dynamics and consumers demands: The sustainable approach of the growing Polish Poultry Industry Lukasz Dominiak General Director KRD-IG Brussels,

32 Market Data PL

33 Market Data PL Poultry Production and Export/Import balance in (in 1000 tonnes) 2,500 2,350 2,250 2,159 2,000 1,849 1,962 1,750 1,500 1,250 1, ,630 1,439 1,368 1,195 1,217 1,107 1,127 1,100 1,

34 Market Data PL Mainpoultry export destinations in 2015 Germany 16.86% UK 8.71% Others 48.49% Czech Rep. 7.93% Slovakia 4.54% Netherlands 6.60% France 6.87%

35 Market data PL pork/poultry/beef consumption (kg per capita)

36 Market Data EU

37 Market Data EU Production forecast of Poultry Meat

38 Market Data EU Change in Poultry slaughter 2014/2015

39 Market Data EU Mainexporters of Poultry Products

40 Market Data EU Export of Poultry Products to Selected Destinations

41 World population growth

42 Sustainable approach

43 3 stages of food percetpion Food quality Food safety Food security

44 KRD-IG activities Limited use of antibiotics Co-organisation of conference together with Warsaw University of Life Sciences (SGGW) about prudent use of antibiotics (June 2016) Beginning of cooperation with Polish Association of Producers and Importers of Veterinary Medicinal Products (POLPROWET) Dissemination among KRD-IG members of Declaration about Prudent Use of VMPs, which was signed during National Pharmaceutical Conference of Veterinary Medicinal Products (November 2016) Commencing of awareness campaigns for stakeholders on responsible use of antibiotics (2017)

45 Use of antibiotics in livestock in EU (EMA) Increased Poultry production Decreased Use of antibiotics

46 KRD-IG activities Information and Education Contract with PR agency to react to false information in media Monitoring of market and sue producers applying unfair practices (e.g. only chicken on the market without antibiotics ) Launching special website where all information about poultry production can be found; also articles written by experts explaining myths that arose around the poultry meat over last years (use of antibiotics, hormones, etc.) Series of meetings with journalists, KOLs, bloggers where experts explain truths and myths about poultry meat

47 Industry aspects Re-use of manure: ü on fields, ü as biogas, ü in energy production (2 new KRD-IG s members) Emphasis on welfare aspects: ü national guidelines issued by CVO in cooperation with KRD-IG ü strict compliance with density requirements ü foot pad dermatitis (FPD) national guidelines on assessment of broilers welfare based on post mortem examination, taking into account FPD

48 Carbon footprint

49 Coping with growing food demand

50 Thank You for Your attention. Łukasz Dominiak General Director KRD-IG

51 Henning Steinfeld Chief of the Livestock Information, FAO