Read more in-depth information on the hot topics related to livestock farming

The real meaning of precision farming

Terminology like digitalization and precision farming may sound futuristic and make people think of farming systems where machines do everything. On the contrary, precision farming is already a reality in many farms, and experience shows that it is not about cutting out the people. In 2020, the global precision agriculture industry generated $6.45 billion and is expected to generate $23.05 billion by 2030. Even though it interacts with technology, the technologies showing early success in precision livestock farming all have a common feature: improving and optimizing farmers’ daily tasks.

This includes many elements, such as paying attention to animal health and welfare, monitoring resource use and productivity, and carbon footprint and emissions. It also allows for data collection and sharing. This is one reason EU farmers and partners adhere to the EU Code of Conduct on Agricultural Data Sharing.

Emerging innovative technology can improve the farmer’s ability to spot and treat animal illness before it becomes a full-blown outbreak that can cost the lives of hundreds of animals and completely devastate a farmer’s livelihood. The use of smart technology creates a potential for spotting early signs of illness, limiting the use of medicine and costs.

Through continuous livestock monitoring, veterinarians and farmers have real-time info at their fingertips, allowing them to take action to keep diseases away from farms and our food supply. New technologies also allow farmers to efficiently use feed and other resources to avoid waste and limit the herd’s carbon footprint. Most importantly, precision farming can help uphold welfare standards by measuring animals’ vital signs consistently and objectively throughout their lifetime to pick up on the first sign of any change.

A wide range of commercially available technologies aims to reduce the occurrence and impact of health issues, such as sensors detecting lameness in cattle, microphones monitoring respiratory health in pigs, or cameras monitoring the presence of parasites in fish.

For example, researchers at KU Leuven in Belgium have developed a microphone and algorithm system using sound monitoring and analyzing technology that can identify the sound of a pig coughing as distinct from all other noises. Another example is the early detection of lameness through video analysis. As an early warning system, farmers and veterinarians can intervene sooner, reduce the animal’s risk of suffering from a severe and prolonged illness, and reduce the eventual use of antibiotics, hence responding to antimicrobial resistance.

Technologies are also widely available to monitor physical health and parameters, such as growth in poultry or estrus in dairy cattle to optimise insemination, increase pregnancy, and improve productivity. Technologies monitoring parameters related to the “nutrition,” “physical environment,” and “behavioural interactions” domains, such as feeding or drinking behaviour, air/water quality or activity, are also designed to optimise productivity and minimise the impacts of diseases.

Finally, various technologies still in development have focused on preventing the occurrence of undesired behaviours which can cause significant injuries, such as tail biting in pigs or feather pecking in poultry.

The connectivity of devices allows the system to be set up to send alerts to farmers and veterinarians either by SMS, through a web-based app or on a digital dashboard, instantly notifying them of a potential underlying health issue. These technologies can also be connected to a climate controller to adapt to the conditions as part of therapeutic response to a health problem.

The ability to monitor animals continuously in real-time throughout their lives and to control their environments means that both productivity and welfare can be improved through early detection of health problems, leading to targeted and reduced use of medication, lower mortality and improved health. These outcomes, in turn, have other social benefits, such as less waste, greater efficiency and lower environmental impact.

The potential of precision livestock farming to help reduce the duration and severity of diseases and injuries in livestock farming systems is promising: technologies can detect health issues early and help ensure optimal environmental conditions. These technologies could benefit welfare significantly if the data are used to support farmers in making effective management decisions, either with or without human intervention.

Furthermore, the smart data collected from thousands of farms can be studied to find solutions for management, disease, welfare, productivity and even environmental issues that have previously been based only on the experience of one company or small-scale research projects. Intelligent use of the large data sets that smart farming makes possible can be used to improve the results of smart farming itself further.

Research points to the great potential for these smart technologies to help livestock farmers monitor their animals’ welfare. Several countries are already investing in their development, reflecting their potential to be part of strategies to move towards more sustainable agriculture.

This is why it is also essential for all farmers to access broadband Internet in Europe!

How much water for 1 kg of meat?

It is often said that 15,000 litres of water are needed to produce 1kg of meat. This is an example of a shock statement used to make good headlines, but the calculations are too often misunderstood and misquoted. With more than 90% of water consumed by livestock being ‘green water’ coming from rainfall, scientists calculate that 1kg of beef would remove around 50 litres of fresh water.

This figure was first released in 2002, when the “water footprint” concept was established, following the growing popularity of the ecological footprint indicators. Arjen Hoekstra, whilst working at the UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, created the water footprint as a metric to measure the amount of water consumed and polluted to produce goods and services along their whole supply chain. Interest in the water footprint increased after its introduction in academic literature. The Water Footprint Network is working on harmonising and promoting the “water footprint” concept.

The water footprint is an indicator of freshwater use that looks not only at the direct water use of a consumer or producer but also the indirect water use. It includes actually “three types of water sources”: blue water, which is the surface or groundwater sourced water consumption by the animals and the irrigation; grey water, which is the water used to depollute the effluents and recycle them; and green water, that is water coming from the rainfall.

Livestock’s water footprint is made of 93% “green water”. It is essential to look at the structure of the water footprint. Regarding livestock average water consumption, more than 90% is green water from rainfall captured in the soil and evaporated by the plants, which returns to the water cycle. This would happen with or without farm animals.

The green water part of these cycles does not reflect the net water consumption for animal production. Real water shortage may only be based on blue water. If green water is taken out of the calculation, the scientific community considers that 550-700 litres are needed to produce 1 kg of beef, including grey and blue water. According to the French national research agency, INRA, 1kg of beef would remove around 50 litres of ‘actual’ (blue) water from the cycle.

Using the same approach, one can estimate that pork meat would require 450 litres, chicken meat 300 litres, eggs 244 litres, and milk 86 litres. To quote the conclusion of the academic publication Animal Frontiers, “Water is a precious resource that must be conserved globally by all sectors of the economy, including agriculture and thus livestock farming. Tools such as the water footprint and LCA are available. Still, policymakers’ interpretation must be refined” conservation of water is necessary, but refinement of the data is required for actual measurement of consumption.

Agriculture accounts for 92% of humanity’s freshwater footprint, and almost one-third of this relates to animal products. This statement coming from a 2006 FAO report “Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options”, which is often reported, is very often also misunderstood, and indeed the report was revised at a later date. If you remove rainfall from the calculation, scientists estimate that livestock industries consume 8% of the global freshwater supply.

Its true meaning and the methodology used to calculate this figure remain unknown. This is why it is essential first to understand the concept of the “water footprint” to estimate the real impact of livestock. Livestock uses one-third of all water resources, including green, grey and blue water. Considering blue and grey water that could compete with fresh water consumption, it is estimated that livestock industries consume 13% of the global water supply. Most of that water is used for intensive, feed-based production. The underlying question is the issue of a potential water resource use competition between livestock production and other human activities.

The world contains an estimated 1,400 million cubic km of water. However, “freshwater resources” are limited. Only 2.5% of all water resources are fresh water, and only 0.003% of this vast amount, about 45 000 cubic km, could be used for drinking, hygiene, agriculture and industry. The rest is locked up in glaciers, permanent snow, or the atmosphere. Moreover, not all of this water is accessible because part of it flows into remote rivers during seasonal floods.

Global water demand is expected to increase significantly in the future, by 50% between 1995 and 2025, especially in developing countries. Not only because of a larger human population but also because of overall increases in industrial production and human affluence, which leads to greater consumption of energy, consumer goods, and food, especially animal products. This increase in domestic, industrial, and agricultural water use is expected to expand the areas affected by water scarcity.

Livestock production and water scarcity should be assessed at a local level. There is not a global water shortage as such, but at individual countries’ and regions’ levels, the problem of water scarcity would need to be tackled. No evidence exists that the presence of livestock is related to the risk of water scarcity. For example, there is little overlap in France between regions with high livestock density and those with water-availability problems in summer, some of the latter being areas with irrigated crops.

Global models are in the early stages of development and do not distinguish between developing and developed countries or their production systems. In some regions, especially developing countries, animals are not used solely for food production but also to provide draught power, fibre and fertiliser for crops. The multiple dimensions of livestock production are not accounted for when considering the water consumption per kilo of product.

In addition, animals use crop by-products that would otherwise go to waste. Water usage for livestock production should be considered an integral part of agricultural water resource management, considering the type of production system, if grain-fed or mixed crop-livestock, and scale, if intensive or extensive. Also, the species and breeds of livestock and the social and cultural aspects of livestock farming in various countries should be considered.

Improved farming practices could help to reduce livestock’s footprint. Still, in Europe, a narrow margin exists when considering improving direct water consumption by the livestock sector, as systems are already well optimised. For ruminants, total water intake is between 3.5 and 5.5 L/kg of dry matter. The greater the water content of the feed, the less drinking water they require. For example, with early-stage fresh grass as feed, animals do not require drinking water. Increasing the proportion of fresh grass or silage in the diet thus decreases drinking water intake.

The main room for improvement to avoid local water shortage risks lies in decreased irrigated feeds. In this direction, several options exist, ranging from using plants requiring less water or selected for their improved genetics to enforcing agronomic practices in fields by farmer feed producers. Livestock can also positively influence water resources. For example, animal use of marshes damages biodiversity less than draining marshes to convert them to agriculture. All these things must be considered before claiming that livestock farming is the primary cause of water waste.

A farmer cares more about animals than money

Any livestock farmer will tell you that animal welfare is a top priority, especially on larger farms. Without happy, well-looked-after animals, you cannot make a living from livestock farming. So, like with any business, making money is essential, but livestock intensification is not about skipping over the basics for animal welfare.

The main goal of any farmer is to generate an income while producing high-quality products that are market-conform. And livestock farming in Europe includes a wide diversity of practices and production methods. So why is it that one term, “intensive farming“, is so often used to portray a negative picture of farming?

The livestock sector has for some time tried to develop a more neutral terminology that could apply to modern, resource-efficient production models. But there will always be difficulties with trying to move beyond the buzz words, especially in media reporting terms.

But no matter the terminology or practices involved, every European livestock farm is subject to strict rules that include animal welfare under the European Convention for the Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purposes. Farming practices considered intensive are an advanced way of farming where, among others, animal health and welfare-related issues, the responsible use of animal genetic resources, sustainable animal nutrition and feeding are closely monitored.

Keeping animals in good health based on improved genetic selection, balanced feed, and advanced monitoring tools will also maximize farmers’ incomes. In this context, what is good for animals is also good for farmers.

The many different types of farming practices in Europe provide populations with a regular supply of safe and affordable milk, meat, fish and eggs. And the modern farming models are quite simply a development in farming that mirrors the development of modern societies.


Farm to Fork Strategy: how to reach the targets?

With the Farm to Fork deadline looming in 8 years’ time and no comprehensive impact assessment in sight, we must build solution-oriented policies, based on the available data we have at hand, with innovation as their cornerstone.

European agri-food production is among the most resource-efficient and sustainable in the world. The European farming sector believes that, with innovation and further support at the forefront of EU agricultural policy, farmers will and can continue to produce in an even more sustainable manner. We acknowledge the expectations of society and policymakers for food production systems and believe that innovation is key in the sustainable transition outlined by the Farm to Fork Strategy. But innovation cannot happen without the necessary legislative and financial support. The agri-food sector calls on European policymakers to enable innovation as a driver of its Farm to Fork targets.

This is how the agri-food value chain can contribute:


The animal health industry is currently at the forefront of a technological and digital transformation. Breakthroughs in biotechnology, detection tools and robotics, genomic testing, and advanced vaccines, amongst others, are set to become essential tools for the future of both livestock farming and the veterinary profession. By supporting access to and training on how to best use such innovations, farmers will be able to optimise the health and welfare of animals in their care, reduce environmental impacts, ensure better traceability, and support responsible use of medicines, amongst others.

AVEC – Association of Poultry Processors and Poultry Trade in the EU Countries

A large part of the GHG emissions associated with the poultry meat sector are coming from feed sources. The European poultry meat sector has the ambition to reduce its environmental impact by using more sustainable feed sources (phasing out the use of feed associated with deforestation) and by further improving the efficiency of the sector (digestibility). The sector is also looking to make its supply chain more circular (by using biogas, solar panels) and more climate-friendly (on transport, packaging and on the use of resources).


The European agricultural machinery sector supports farmers of all farm types and sizes to get the most from their land, while protecting the environment and bringing economic and social value. Investments in advanced farm machinery, precision farming technologies and digital solutions will help our farmers stay competitive in the transition towards more sustainable farming practices, ensuring a generation renewal of European farming activities. The objectives of the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork strategy cannot be achieved without smart technologies and digital transformation. We call on European policy makers to champion the uptake of precision farming and smart technologies through advanced agricultural machinery and solutions.


Impact assessments and studies have shown the significant impacts of the Farm to Fork targets on EU agricultural production and trade, as well as on EU farmers. The feasibility of reaching these targets will depend on the support provided to innovative practices, techniques and products. In particular, the current and future regulatory framework on plant protection must avoid the arising of agro-technical deadlocks resulting from the removal of plant protection solutions from the farmers’ toolbox before viable alternative come onstream. Enough time must be given for viable alternatives from innovation to become effectively available to (and workable for) farmers. Furthermore, policy/regulatory framework should not inhibit but promote innovation, notably as regards new plant breeding techniques and their results. Last but not least, policy/regulatory framework should be able to take account of the extent to which good agricultural practices, including IPM, are already applied by farmers in the EU.


The European Meat Processing sector believes that a swift transition towards more sustainable food systems should be made in a holistic, fair and coordinated way, by taking into account that any sector is part of the solution and solutions should be found within any sector. There are no sustainable and unsustainable sectors, but more and less sustainable business practices. The debate is now based on a divisive approach which could undermine the target of more sustainable food systems. We call on a less divisive approach in the implementation of the Farm to Fork Strategy, the removal of regulatory bottlenecks which can limit innovation and harmonized solutions which can promote a level playing field for the European operators.


The upcoming global challenges our food chains have started facing – from climate change to disruptive innovation – require comprehensive regulation to better adapt and possibly thrive in uncertain times. Safe crop protection solutions placed on the EU market, together with qualified advisory to farmers and growers, help meet the productivity goals under the Farm to Fork, thereby providing safe, affordable food for the EU population. Yet,

interconnectedness and rapid evolution of our food systems food demand unparalleled and fast-adapting regulatory tools.
COCERAL believes that standards established at the international level plus continuous dialogue with third countries should inspire actions directed to harmonisation, lessening hidden barriers whilst maintaining high safety standards for consumers and citizens wherever they live, plus environmental care.Advancements flourishing in the domain of sustainable alternatives and green agriculture – including life sciences and biotechnology – should ideally be reflected in enabling regulatory frameworks in due course. Furthermore, innovation doesn’t stop at borders. There is much need for a world-oriented and future- looking European policy for innovation, accounting for food security, safety and sustainability, as well as for interoperability of current supply chains. In the absence of this, EU traders and Food Business Operators alike will be confronted with hidden obstacles and costly consequences. To do this, we believe that the broader EU regulatory architecture must have a fast-paced, solutions enabling and innovation-focused approach, with local relevance but also global outreach.


Copa-Cogeca agree with the main goals set out in the Farm to Fork Strategy, we know that changes are necessary, and we remain committed to playing our part in the path towards a transition to a more sustainable food system. Indeed, European farmers, forest owners and their cooperatives are already all working in that direction. We are now waiting for concrete proposals from the Commission, especially on the blind spots identified in the ongoing debate such as on the effects of carbon leakage, European strategic autonomy, or consumer prices. This is about finding new EU enabling ways to contribute to change in a practical and realistic manner talking about: low risk substances – to replace means to combat pest and disease while losing synthetic molecules; New Breeding/Genomic Techniques to improve farming resilience naturally through better genetic material; developing dynamic market for nutrients, by mineral fertilisers and in particular organic fertilisers; Next steps in the Unfair Trading Practices Directive, for more balanced, transparent value chain; Policy consistency across the EU – we are committed to the common policies, but how will this will be translated into the increasingly open international trade.

CropLife Europe

We need a regulatory framework that supports innovation in agriculture which will help deliver the European green and digital transformations. EU authorisation giving timely access to a variety of innovative crop protection solutions is the most important part of farmers’ ability to improve quality, market access and tradability of fresh produce.

EFFAB – European Forum of Farm Animal Breeders

Through selective animal breeding, we achieve better use of feed by animals, reduced carbon footprint and improved animal health and welfare whilst preserving genetic resources – from conventional to organic farming. However, we need more support for research and innovation and to develop legal instruments and tools, in order to accelerate the genetic improvement of farmed animals, and to provide further solutions for farmers, breeders and our society boosting sustainability of EU food systems.

ELO European Landowners Organisation

Innovations such as the New Genomic Techniques (NGT) need to be considered if we are serious about reaching the F2F targets and remain competitive at a global scale. The EU’s current legal framework on GMOs needs to be revised and gene-editing research needs to be encouraged to bridge the gap with other major producing countries. Likewise, we need to have more safe crop protection products and fertilisers on the market. Farmers need them in order to make the transition towards a more sustainable and viable food system. Enabling SMEs access on the market by ensuring a lighter registration process can give farmers the tools they need to reach the ambitious targets set for them.


The biorefineries that produce renewable ethanol are working, real-life examples of the bioeconomy in action. European feedstock grown by EU farmers is used to make several important products: including not just renewable low-carbon fuel but also food, high- protein GMO-free animal feed, alcohol for use in hand sanitiser, and captured CO2 for beverage use. The Farm-to-Fork Strategy should promote this domestic biorefinery system, empowering EU climate ambitions, improving food security and ensuring a strategic supply chain.


We need a regulatory environment that encourages plant breeding and delivers on both purposes: quality assurance for customers (the reproductive material meets their demands regardless of the production system, conventional/organic) and speeding up the development of new varieties (for which New Genomic Techniques are a crucial element).


The Farm to Fork strategy has recognised the key role of specialty feed ingredients stressing the need to facilitate the placing on the market of sustainable and innovative feed additives. The up-coming modernization of the EU feed additive rules is a unique opportunity to address the shortcomings of the current regulatory framework, such as the lengthy and costly authorization procedure, unnecessary administrative burden, the regulatory hurdles to the application of digital solutions, and the need for alignment with other EU legislation. We are calling on the European Commission to work with the stakeholders of the feed sector in order to elaborate a proposal that supports innovation and progress towards achieving objectives of the Green Deal/Farm to Fork Strategy with the help of feed additives.


The production of feed for food-producing animals plays a key role in determining the sustainability of animal products. Animal production itself plays a key role in determining the sustainability of the whole food system. The impacts that the Farm to Fork Strategy is envisioned to make on the EU Regulatory Framework respective to food production should start from the premises that the different farm animals and the different livestock farming systems all have their strengths, as they excel differently in terms of nutrient and resource efficiency. In the effort to further boost the livestock sector’s role in circular economy, with

its capacity to absorb residual biomass from other (industrial) food and non-food sectors, the EU should keep in mind that efforts to boost the sustainability of energy production, with use of advanced biofuels, can impact the competitive access of the feed sector to residual biomass flows in the future.

Fertilizers Europe

As 50 % of global food production is down to the use of mineral fertilizers, the European fertilizer industry plays a vital role in ensuring a resilient European agriculture and in providing citizens with affordable and nutritious food. Increased nutrient use efficiency will be key to meet Europe’s ambitious goal of reducing nutrient losses while ensuring no deterioration of soil fertility. This goal can best be achieved by increasing nutrient use efficiency and setting up nutrient management plans as well as development and uptake of on-farm precise fertilization techniques. The sector is committed to work hand-in hand with farmers to advance a productive, resilient and sustainable EU agriculture.


Without innovative techniques, it is quite clear that the EU farming community and its downstream users would be unable to guarantee sufficient affordable high-quality produce for EU citizens and for the growing world population – and as a consequence achieve all the ambitious goals foreseen in the Farm-to-Fork Strategy. Innovative techniques such as New Genomic Techniques are key in meeting society’s growing demand to speed up efforts to further increase sustainability and respect for the environment. However, innovation requires time and investments in terms of R&D to overcome technical barriers. The uncertainty currently generated at EU level risks preventing NGTs from becoming mainstream and a permanent part of the agricultural toolbox. Linked to this, the effects of climate change, as well as the efforts made to face them, affect all individuals and economic sectors, but in particular rural communities and agriculture. Agriculture being one of the economic sectors most strongly depending on natural conditions, the efforts required to adapt to a changing environment are particularly important for farmers. The Agriculture & Progress Platform would therefore like to call upon the European Commission to not only integrate globally the challenges of agriculture in its policies but to additionally see agriculture as a means to an end / key player for achieving them (climate change, energy transition, bio economy, …).


The European Livestock and Meat Trades Union is a reliable sustainability actor from the economic, ecological and social angle
– in the way our 50 associations and 20 000 companies handle welfare, trade, and reduce emissions

– in our supportive approach to the Farm-to-Fork strategy
– in concretely working towards a science-based methodology to devise solutions to our environmental footprint and in developing a data-based sensitivity analysis (to be communicated soon)

From farm to fork via factory, UECBV implements a true circular economy approach based on trade. It aims for a balanced biosystem which includes animals and plant production, supports innovation and prepares for the expected transition. Meat is a nutritious and cultural food able to be produced in a sustainable manner and delivering on consumer expectations. UECBV is strongly involved in finding innovative solutions using given and developing tools like the already signed Code of Conduct, and is able to open doors to transversal approaches for a proven resilient sector.

Agriculture and Progress – European Platform for Sustainable Agricultural Production
Agri-food Chain Coalition – European agri-food chain joint initiative
AnimalhealthEurope – European Animal Medicines Industry
AVEC – European Association of Poultry Processors and Poultry Trade
CEMA –European Agricultural Machinery Association
CIBE – International Confederation of European Beet Growers
Clitravi – Liaison Centre for the Meat Processing Industry in the European Union
COCERAL – European association of trade in cereals, oilseeds, pulses, olive oil, oils and fats, animal feed and agrosupply
Copa-Cogeca – European Farmers and Agri-Cooperatives
CropLife Europe- Europe’s Industry representing sustainable crop protection solutions
EFFAB – European Forum of Farm Animal Breeders
ELO – European Landowners’ Organization
European Livestock Voice – European Platform of the Livestock Food Chain
Euroseeds – European Seed Sector
ePURE – European Renewable Ethanol Industry
FEFAC – European Feed Manufacturers’ Federation
FEFANA – European Association of Specialty Feed Ingredients and their Mixtures
Fertilizers Europe – European Fertilizer Producers
UECBV – European Livestock and Meat Trades Union

PRESS RELEASE – Dialogue opens with EVP Timmermans on the future of European livestock farming

On 7 December sector associations from European Livestock Voice invited EVP Timmermans to visit a beef and dairy farm in the Wallonia region of Belgium. The visit organised in cooperation with local farming Union FWA, was a great opportunity for EVP Timmermans to engage in a direct and open discussion with livestock farmers on the Green Deal objectives. It was also a first step in opening an action-oriented dialogue between the Commission EVP and EU representatives of the livestock value chain on the future developments of the Farm to Fork strategy. The European livestock sector has been investing in making improvements for many years now with measurable outcomes in many areas. With best-in-class standards of animal health and welfare and among the lowest global livestock emissions, high  standards  on  environment,  the  sector  does not shy away from continuing to adapt to meet increasing demands. All representatives of the European livestock sector agree on the fact that more needs to be done to meet social, environmental, and animal welfare challenges. But no one should be left behind.

The EU livestock sector is calling for a consistent approach. As the recent debates around the Farm to Fork strategy have shown, there are many questions that need to be answered to ensure that efforts made in the EU do not lead to climate or environmental dumping elsewhere. It is also essential for the livestock sector to be able to invest in the tools and production methods best suited to match an unprecedented situation. There are now many interesting proposals being discussed at European level, notably on carbon farming, on animal welfare labelling or changes to current EU legislation to stimulate innovation in animal production to meet the challenging targets of the European Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategy. The livestock sector must be a key partner in these discussions. The EU livestock sector must retain its possibility and capacity to continue contributing to sustainability.

Representatives of the 12 sectoral associations – breeders, animal health, feed and specialty feed ingredients, farmers and agri co-operatives, dairy and poultry producers, meat processors, foie gras producers, livestock traders, leather and fur producers – are all united in the belief that collectively we can deliver on the ambitious EU actions and targets. Nevertheless, it is certain that pledges to deliver on targets must be a two-way agreement. Coherence between EU policies and support measures is needed, and there must be a balance of the burden of changes for the primary producer, as for the retailer, as for the consumer.

It was in this spirit and with the aim of finding solutions that a roundtable discussion was held between the livestock value chain stakeholders and EVP Timmermans following the visit to François-Hubert and Stéphane Van Eyck’s Farm.

Commenting after the event on behalf of European Livestock Voice, Birthe Steenberg said: “As the Commission is now working on concrete proposals to materialise the Farm to Fork strategy, this open dialogue was an important step forward in ensuring that the voice of the livestock sector is heard in the wide debate around food systems sustainability. We welcome the willingness of Commission EVP Timmermans to come onto ‘our turf’ and we hope to continue these active debates next year to ensure balanced and positive outcomes for all involved.”

Closing the event Commission VP Timmermans said: “In our efforts to tackle the climate crisis, agriculture has to move from being part of the problem to being part of the solution. Overall, the Common Agricultural Policy is there to help farmers move in the right direction. In livestock farming, the solutions must focus on reducing emissions and creating an overall sustainable industry. Because to feed 10 billion people in the future, the world will need a sustainable livestock industry.”


© Bernal Revert

Notes for editors:
About European Livestock voice: 
European Livestock Voice is a multi-stakeholder group of like-minded partners in the livestock food chain that have decided to unite for the first time to balance the debate surrounding a sector that plays such an essential role in Europe’s rich heritage and future. The associations involved, which represent sectors ranging from animal health to feed, to breeding and animal farming through to farmers, aim to inform the public about the societal value of livestock production and its contribution to global challenges, offering an alternative narrative to current debates. 

•  AnimalhealthEurope – European manufacturers of animal medicines, vaccines and other animal health products
•    Avec – European Poultry Meat Sector 
•    Clitravi – European Meat Processing Industry 
•    Copa and Cogeca – European Farmers and European Agri-cooperatives
•    COTANCE – European Leather Industry 
•    EDA – European Dairy Association 
•    EFFAB – European Forum of Farm Animal Breeders 
•    Euro Foie Gras – European Foie Gras industry 
•    FEFAC – European Feed Manufacturers 
•    FEFANA – European Specialty Feed Ingredients Industry 
•    FUR EUROPE – European Fur Industry 
•    UECBV – European Livestock and Meat Trades 


EURACTIV Virtual Conference 27-01-2022 09:30 – 10:45am CET

The Farm to Fork strategy, which outlines several targets to green the EU’s agri-food sector, has sparked debate ever since its unveiling in May 2020.

The outcomes of some initial studies on the Farm to Fork’s impact concluded that the Farm to Fork’s goals are in reach but risk a significant reduction in EU food production and farmers’ income, underlining their fears about the strategy’s potential impact on the sector.

Environmental organisations have been quick to highlight the shortcomings of these. They say the studies do not consider the full range of benefits that more sustainable production would bring to the sector.

A main divide between the two sides is that industry wants an overall impact assessment of the Farm to Fork strategy, whereas environmental organisations believe that evaluating each measure in the strategy would be sufficient.

Join this EURACTIV Virtual Conference to discuss what we still do not know about the impact of the EU’s Farm to Fork strategy on farmers, consumers, and the environment. And what policy instruments will be needed to reach the targets?



Video: The blind spots of the Farm to Fork targets

14 October 2021: In 2020, the EU launched a set of communications on strategies for transitioning to a more sustainable food system. The two main strategies to achieve this goal are the Farm to Fork and the Biodiversity strategies, part of a greater agenda: the EU Green Deal. These strategies propose a number of quantified targets to support Europe’s long-term goal for climate neutrality by 2050. But the European Commission has so far not produced an impact assessment study, and the policy process has started in the European Parliament, where additional proposals have been added to the initial draft strategies. Various independent and academic studies have been published in meantime. These studies have limits and they do not replace the work that the Commission services should produce. However, they increase our knowledge, display complementary views and highlight common trends regardless of the model they use. This video gives a summary of their findings.

Joint Statement – On the European Parliament plenary vote on the Farm to Fork Strategy

Yesterday, the European Parliament voted on its Farm to Fork own initiative report. Food chain actors acknowledge the signal sent by this vote but regret the climate in which the vote took place. We talked about everything but the actual means and solutions when it comes to addressing the multiple blind spots this strategy has created.

Food chain actors all agree with the main goals set out in the Farm to Fork Strategy, we know that changes are necessary, and we remain committed to playing our part in the path towards a transition to a more sustainable food system. Indeed we are already all working in that direction. What we are currently lacking however is new tools and a clearer roadmap. The 2030 deadline is looming, and changes cannot be assimilated overnight.

We are now waiting for concrete proposals from the Commission, especially on the blind spots identified in the ongoing debate such as on the effects of carbon leakage, European strategic autonomy, or consumer prices. With this in mind we also welcome the clear signal sent by the Parliament calling on the European Commission to prepare a comprehensive impact assessment evaluating the impact of its strategy. The data overview presented by the Commission earlier this week[1] would be a great starting point for such a study.



Agriculture and Progress – European Platform for Sustainable Agricultural Production
Agri-Food Chain Coalition – European agri-food chain joint initiative
AnimalHealthEurope – European Animal Medicines Industry
AVEC – European Association of Poultry Processors and Poultry Trade
CEFS – European Association of Sugar Manufacturers
CEJA – European Council of Young Farmers
CEMA – European Agricultural Machinery Industry
CEPM – European Confederation of Maize Production
CEVI – European Confederation of Independent Winegrowers
CIBE – International Confederation of European Beet Growers
Clitravi – Liaison Centre for the Meat Processing Industry in the European Union
COCERAL – European association of trade in cereals, oilseeds, pulses, olive oil, oils and fats, animal feed and agrosupply
Copa-Cogeca – European Farmers and Agri-Cooperatives
CropLife Europe – Europe’s Crop Protection Industry
EBB – European Biodiesel Board
EDA – European Dairy Association
EFFAB – European Forum of Farm Animal Breeders
ELO – European Landowners’ Organization
European Livestock Voice – European Platform of the Livestock Food Chain (with the support of Carni Sostenibili)
Euro Foie Gras – European Federation of Foie Gras
Euroseeds – European Seed Sector
ePURE – European Renewable Ethanol Industry
Fediol – European Vegetable Oil and Protein-Meal Industry Association
FEFAC – European Feed Manufacturers’ Federation
Fertilizers Europe – European Fertilizer Producers
IBC – International Butchers’ Confederation
UECBV – European Livestock and Meat Trades Union



Without a comprehensive impact assessment, we will not be celebrating the one-year anniversary of the Farm to Fork strategy.

Today marks one year to the day since the Farm to Fork strategy was presented in Brussels by the European Commission. However, we cannot celebrate its anniversary, as the strategy still raises too many questions in the European farming and agri-food community. A year of intense debate has only increased the number of our concerns.

We, the signatories of this declaration, do not have a single doubt that the Farm to Fork strategy with its targets will have a considerable impact on the whole agricultural value chain, from farmers to our food systems and to consumers throughout the Union. But most probably not on the ones initially hoped for or expected.

Let’s be perfectly clear, we are not opposed in essence to the approach proposed within the Farm to Fork strategy or the Green Deal. We are all conscious that our food system must integrate further measures to improve its sustainability as fast as possible while maintaining the highest quality standards and food affordability.

Nevertheless, not only will this strategy have an impact on the environmental quality of our agriculture, but it will also impact on our production capacity, our competitiveness, our imports and ultimately on consumer prices. As it has been demonstrated over the past year, there are also considerable paradoxes in the composition of those generalised objectives, and by the time these are widely understood, it will be too late. We must not shy away from the debate on these paradoxes. We must collectively discuss them because, even if there appears to be a collective disregard at EU-level these days, the stakes are too high.

A comprehensive impact assessment would have been the appropriate way to engage in a concrete discussion on the substance of the Farm to Fork strategy. Such a study was promised by Vice-President Frans Timmermans. However, although this was promised on many occasions in line with the principles of “good governance” of the Commission, we now know that such as assessment will not be carried out. Yet the Commission’s principles on the subject are clear, “An impact assessment is required for Commission initiatives that are likely to have significant economic, environmental or social impacts.(1) (…) Impact assessments collect evidence to assess if future legislative or non-legislative EU action is justified and how such action can best be designed to achieve desired policy objectives (2).” In the face of the challenges posed to our food security, this neglect on the part of the Commission is both incomprehensible and unacceptable.

Individual studies on the different objectives of the strategy are not sufficient. It is only by cumulating and cross-checking the different targets proposed in the strategy that one can realise the real challenges posed by the strategy. In the area of trade policy, the same Commission has had the courage to propose a comprehensive study of the complex cumulative impacts involved in the more than 60 trade agreements signed by the EU. So why shouldn’t this be possible for the Farm to Fork strategy? Why has the US government already conducted a study on our own flagship policy ?(3)

We are asking for the application of three common sense principles: to have a policy based on concrete data and scientific evidence that is in line with the better regulation principles, not on ideology and political stances; to start talking about concrete tools and technologies capable of creating enthusiasm in our farming community for this political project and finally to have the same level of ambition in the EU internal market vis-à-vis those international trade partners that don’t share the same ambitions.



AnimalHealthEurope – European Animal Medicines Industry
Agriculture and Progress – European Platform for Sustainable Agricultural Production
AVEC – European Association of Poultry Processors and Poultry Trade
Ceettar – European Organisation of Agricultural, Rural and Forestry Contractors
CEFS – European Association of Sugar Manufacturers
CEJA – European Council of Young Farmers
CEMA – European Agricultural Machinery Industry
CEPM – European Confederation of Maize Production
CEVI – European Confederation of Independent Winegrowers
CIBE – International Confederation of European Beet Growers
Clitravi – Liaison Centre for the Meat Processing Industry in the European Union
COCERAL – European association of trade in cereals, oilseeds, pulses, olive oil, oils and fats, animal feed and agrosupply
Copa-Cogeca – European Farmers and Agri-Cooperatives
Cotance – European Confederation of National Associations of Tanners and Dressers
EDA – European Dairy Association
EFFAB – European Forum of Farm Animal Breeders
ELO – European Landowners’ Organization
ePURE – European Renewable Ethanol Industry
Euromontana – European Association of Mountain Areas
European Livestock Voice – European Platform of the Livestock Food Chain (with the support of its local partners CARNI SOSTENIBILI (IT) and SOMOS GANADERIA (ES)).
Euroseeds – European seed sector Association
FARM EUROPE – European Think Tank on Rural Economies
FEAP – Federation of European Aquaculture Producers
FEFAC – European Feed Manufacturers’ Federation
FEFANA – European Association of Specialty Feed Ingredients and their Mixtures
Fertilizers Europe – European Fertilizer Industry Association
Euro Foie Gras – European Federation of foie gras
IBC – International Butchers’ Confederation
UECBV – European Livestock and Meat Trades Union

For further information, please contact:
François Guerin
Senior Policy Advisor

Jean-Baptiste Boucher
Communications Director
Mobile: + 32 474 840 836

The Joint Declaration can be found here in DE, EN, ES, FR, IT, PL and RO.

The Farm to Fork Strategy – what do studies say about its impact on the European livestock sector?

13 October, 11:30-12:30 via Zoom

A lot is said about the role livestock plays in our food systems, and the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity strategies have been driving debates on what sustainable food systems and food production should look like in the future.
The strategies propose ambitious EU actions and targets to accelerate the transition to a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system, while preserving food affordability and generating fairer economic returns.

But these proposals have raised many questions and generated several studies which look at their potential impact on our food systems, both within and outside the EU.

Watch our Dialogue between Scientists and an MEP to discuss findings from some of these impact analyses ahead of the upcoming vote in the European Parliament.


Prof. Christian Henning, Kiel University
Prof. Roel Jongeneel, Wageningen University and Research
MEP Anne Sander, AGRI Committee
This webinar complements the Euractiv event supported by Croplife being held on 12 October which looks at impacts of the Farm to Fork strategy on crop-based agriculture.

Transparency note:
The Kiel University study was funded by the Grain Club and other associations. More info and study link
The Wageningen University & Research paper was funded by several members of European Livestock Voice. Link to Executive Summary



Food chain actors all agree with the main principles set out in the Farm to Fork strategy and are fully aware that constant and substantial improvement must be made to ensure a more sustainable approach to our food systems. Nevertheless, several recently published studies on the Farm to Fork strategy indicate that the current targets, if implemented as proposed, will come at a considerable cost for EU farmers and the viability of the entire European agribusiness sector.

The time for political messages about the Farm to Fork strategy has passed. It is now time to analyse the data that is currently available. In recent months, several key reports and studies have tried to assess and measure the impacts of the targets set by the European Commission when they presented the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity strategies in May 2020.

Studies conducted by the USDA , HFFA Research , the Joint Research Centre of the EU (JRC) , Kiel University as well as Wageningen University and Research (WUR) all conclude that there are several significant impacts, trade-offs and blind spots that urgently need to be considered by policy-makers in the EU (and beyond).

For example:
• The JRC study predicts that the expected decrease of between 40 and 60% of GHG emissions from European agriculture resulting from the implementation of Farm to Fork targets will lead to European agricultural production, including its emissions, being outsourced to third countries.
• The Kiel University study projects that Europe could become a net food importer, which is in direct contradiction with the open strategic autonomy promoted by the European Commission during the COVID crisis.
• The USDA study concludes that the targets set in the Farm to Fork strategy could lead to 22 million people being subject to food insecurity.

Why is Europe not looking at the data?

These studies, which each use different methodologies and have different focal points and limitations, all complement each other. They all reach the same conclusions. EU agricultural production will decrease and quite drastically in some areas and for some products. For the cumulative impact of the targets, the latest WUR study shows an average production decline of between 10-20%[1] with a drop of up to 30% for certain crops.

As regards livestock production, the study from the University of Kiel points to a 20% reduction in EU beef production and a 17% reduction for pork production on average. A further WUR policy paper (soon to be published) confirms an overall decrease in beef, pig and dairy production, leading not only to a price increase for EU consumers but also showing questionable effects on livestock farmers’ incomes.

The data clearly points to impacts on trade, on farmers’ incomes and ultimately on consumer prices. Changing the food system under these conditions will be more difficult, and imposing consumption taxes, as proposed by the European Parliament, could make it socially unjust.

All the actors in the agri-food chain are aware of the environmental and climate challenges that we are facing today. We are all committed to playing our part in the fight to mitigate the negative effects of climate change. European agricultural production is among the most resource and environmentally friendly production in the world. Nevertheless, European producers believe that with innovation and relevant support at the core of EU agricultural policy, farmers will continue to produce in an even more sustainable manner. We acknowledge society’s and policy-makers’ expectations in the realm of food production. However, a non-data based, political target will have deleterious effects on European agriculture. We must build solution-oriented policies based on the data we have to hand, with innovation being their cornerstone.

In order to start talking about solutions, we need to have a common understanding of the challenges that we face in pursuit of our Farm to Fork objectives. This common understanding should be based on a comprehensive and cumulative impact assessment conducted by the European Commission. The most recent Wageningen study, with its different scenarios, clearly shows that assessing the effects of Farm to Fork targets in isolation, as the Commission seems to envision doing from now on, will only give a partial picture of the cumulative reality faced by farmers and agri-food players on the ground.

We are just as eager as the Commission to end this debate on the necessity to carry out a cumulative impact assessment. We call for a comprehensive assessment because we want to understand where problems are likely to arise so that we can discuss the potential solutions.

Europe’s food production model, spearheaded by the Common Agricultural Policy, has been one of the greatest successes of the European Union. We do not understand the apparent attempt to hinder our progress and disregard our successes at a time when our trading partners are already talking about filling the production gaps left vacant by Europe.

In addition, if EU production decreases, as all researchers who have assessed the impact of the Commission’s current proposals clearly expect, then EU imports of agricultural raw materials and ingredients are bound to increase significantly, thus making the EU dependent on imports to feed its population. This would in turn pose several political and food safety risks for European consumers.

It is high time that the European Commission conduct a holistic impact assessment. The Farm to Fork deadline is looming. Eight years for the agricultural sector is not that long. We urgently need to see concrete proposals and a more in-depth discussion about the choices we are making. That said, this must be based on better data.

[1] Summary of results Scenario 4: red. pesticide and nutrient use, 10% set aside



Agriculture and Progress – European Platform for Sustainable Agricultural Production
Agri-Food Chain Coalition – European agri-food chain joint initiative
AnimalhealthEurope – European Animal Medicines Industry
AVEC – European Association of Poultry Processors and Poultry Trade
CEFS – European Association of Sugar Manufacturers
CEJA – European Council of Young Farmers
CEMA – European Agricultural Machinery Industry
CEPM – European Confederation of Maize Production
CEVI – European Confederation of Independent Winegrowers
CIBE – International Confederation of European Beet Growers
Clitravi – Liaison Centre for the Meat Processing Industry in the European Union
COCERAL – European association of trade in cereals, oilseeds, pulses, olive oil, oils and fats, animal feed and agrosupply
Copa-Cogeca – European Farmers and Agri-Cooperatives
CropLife Europe – Europe’s Crop Protection Industry
EBB – European Biodiesel Board
EDA – European Dairy Association
EFFAB – European Forum of Farm Animal Breeders
ELO – European Landowners’ Organization
European Livestock Voice – European Platform of the Livestock Food Chain
Euro Foie Gras – European Federation of Foie Gras
Euroseeds – European Seed Sector
ePURE – European Renewable Ethanol Industry
UECBV – European Livestock and Meat Trades Union
FEFAC – European Feed Manufacturers’ Federation
FEFANA – European Association of Specialty Feed Ingredients and their Mixtures
Fertilizers Europe – European Fertilizer Producers
IBC – International Butchers’ Confederation

The Joint Declaration can also be found here in DE, ES, FR, IT, PL and RO.

Join us for our event on the platform of EUNews, and in joint affiliation with Carni Sostenibili!



The Farm to Fork strategy sets the general principles for the future of our food system but on what basis?


Claire Bury – EU Commission, Deputy Director General DG SANTE

Herbert Dorfmann – European Parliament, AGRI Rapporteur

Jytte Guteland – European Parliament, ENVI Committee

Pekka Pesonen – Secretary-General of Copa-Cogeca

Luigi Scordamaglia – President Assocarni

And moderator: Angelo di Mambro – Brussels correspondant for ANSA agency & Informatore Agrario

Be sure to register here for the event on 5th May from 15:00-16:30 CEST!

Download the invite here!

Does the Farm to Fork strategy offer more opportunities or obstacles for the European agri-food system?

Rome – Brussels, 06 May 2021 – The live stream meeting, “Food and Farming: what future for Europe?” was held yesterday afternoon. This  deep-dive into the Farm to Fork Strategy promoted by Eunews in collaboration with Carni Sostenibili and European Livestock Voice served as an open dialogue between policy makers and the livestock value chain following the launch of the video appeal, “The 9 paradoxes of the Farm to Fork”. The European livestock sector is keen to forge a constructive dialogue with the EU institutions to ensure greater involvement in the legislative process for the strategy intended to guide EU agri-food policies in the coming decades. 

“Our post-Covid-19 future will not – and must not – be simply ‘let’s go back to business as usual’. Each actor will have to play their role to successfully achieve the transition to sustainable food systems. Livestock is an essential sector of EU agriculture and is part of the solution, and I count on this sector to pursue its efforts towards sustainable production in line with the objectives of the Green Deal.” – said Claire Bury, Deputy Director General DG SANTE of the European Commission, who participated in the debate.

Luigi Scordamaglia, President of Assocarni and Italian representative for the Carni Sostenibili Association, spoke precisely on the risks and opportunities of the Farm to Fork strategy. “An extraordinary opportunity” – notes Scordamaglia – “but also a risk, namely that this green transition is not guided by an objective and rational approach, based on numbers and data, but is conditioned by ideological approaches and this would transform an opportunity into a defeat for producers but also for European consumers”. Concerning sustainability, which is increasingly the focal point in which the debate gets heated, President Scordamaglia recalled: “To those who think that one becomes sustainable by returning to using a wooden plough, I would like to point out that the results in sustainability achieved in Italy derive from being the second country in the world in the use of robotics and in the automation of the food sector. We are the eighth economy in the world for GDP, but only the third from last regarding CO2 emissions. This is the path to sustainability that we want”. – concluded Scordamaglia.

“I believe that the Farm to Fork strategy proposed by the Commission for agri-food chains is of high value due to the effective involvement of both consumers and operators. However, we must assess the impacts of this strategy principally from an economic and social perspective: this is important for citizens and especially for operators who are committed to guaranteeing accessibility to and affordability of food” declared Herbert Dorfmann, MEP, AGRI Committee, reiterating that “a scientific approach is essential to sustainability”.

On distant but not diametrically opposed positions MEP Jytte Guteland, from the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats stressed the need for a change of pace also in the livestock sector in view of sustainability objectives. According to the MEP, the sector has not yet achieved this. “With regard to the Farm to Fork strategy there is a lot of sensitivity, but it should be recalled that we are going through a historic period with the Green Deal which represents a fundamental step for future generations. The direction on sustainability must be clear” – said Guteland – “although much has been done, there is still work to be done, but we can achieve our goals. Farmers today are the real heroes of everyday life because food is the source of life. However, we need a sustainable future for this sector, a new direction for Europe in the distribution of incentives that must be destined above all to those farmers who decide to orient practices towards sustainability”. And she concluded, “In summary we can say that farmers are not part of the problem but part of the solution”.

Finally, Pekka Pesonen, Copa – Cogeca Secretary General, who spoke on behalf of European Livestock Voice, the Association that brings together the European Livestock value chain associations, recalled the commitment in terms of sustainability of animal husbandry, underlining its economic value. Today, in fact, the sector represents about 40% of the entire European agricultural sector for a value of 170 billion Euro with 4 million employees. “What we need” – concluded Pesonen – “is for the European Union to implement policies that allow the agricultural sector to make the necessary changes to maintain our European de-centralized  model of agriculture, a model that would sustain world-known culinary heritage, contribute to the wider economy in rural areas, support circularity and respond to the future expectations of consumers.”

Note to the Editors

European Livestock Voice is a multi-stakeholder group of like-minded EU partners united to return a balanced debate about a sector that is playing such an essential role in Europe’s rich heritage and future. The associations represent sectors ranging from animal health to feed, from breeding and animal farming to farmers; together they aim to inform the public about the social value of livestock production and its contribution to global challenges, offering another perspective in the ongoing debates.

Association Carni Sostenibili is a non-profit association that represents all the production chains dedicated to the processing and transformation of Italian meat (beef, pork and poultry), with the aim of promoting sustainable production and conscious consumption of meat and cured meats. Founded in 2012, the association has created a digital communication platform, supported by the publication of studies and research, to promote correct scientific information and its divulgation, regarding the environmental, economic and social sustainability of the entire meat supply chain.

This event was also supported by Somos Ganaderia. The Spanish version of this Press Release can be found here.

For further information, please contact:
 European Livestock Voice                              
Florence Ranson
+32 (0) 477 49 26 90

Association Carni Sostenibili
Elena Giacchino
+39 340 26 82 776

25 March 2021: In case you missed our launch event, check out our video here:

Alternatively you can watch it in:

French >>> Polish >>> German >>> Portuguese >>> Italian >>> Spanish >>>

25 March 2021 – The European livestock sector presented today “The 9 paradoxes of Farm to Fork”, a call to actively participate in the current sustainability challenge to develop and implement an effective and adequate Farm to Fork strategy for Europe. Born from an initiative of Carni Sostenibili and European Livestock Voice, the series of videos was launched simultaneously in 7 European countries and languages: Belgium, Italy, France, Spain, Germany, Portugal and Poland.
The videos highlight the fact that despite good intentions, the Farm to Fork strategy does not take into consideration the actual situation and challenges of the livestock sector. They reflect the will of the whole chain to be actively involved in the great green transition process, now in progress.
The paradoxes identified reflect misconceptions and prejudices surrounding the livestock sector in terms of the environment, health and the economy. They reveal inaccuracies in the understanding of:
– The nutritional value of meat
– The consistency of land use for livestock farming activities
– The environmental sustainability of the European livestock chain
– The economic impact of the sector
– The protection of animal welfare
– The use of natural vs chemical fertilizers
Job security and employment in rural areas  
The gastronomic and cultural heritage of animal-source products
– The security and availability of our food products

>>> Read the full Press Release

European Livestock Voice and Carni Sostenibili invite you to the launch of their series of videos: “The 9 paradoxes of Farm to Fork”, on Thursday 25 March, at 11am, broadcasted online from the Brussels Press Club. The EU Farm to Fork strategy is high in ambition, but Europe’s livestock sector fears it does not really take into consideration its farming traditions and the huge progress already achieved. EU livestock farmers are committed actors of change for increased sustainability, but they believe that the Farm to Fork approach is based on erroneous preconceptions. European Livestock Voice and the Italian sustainable meat project, Carni Sostenibili have identified a number of paradoxes in a series of short videos, to be made available simultaneously in 7 EU countries and languages*. The videos will be introduced by Birthe Steenberg, Secretary General of AVEC and representative of European Livestock Voice, and Prof. Giuseppe Pulina, Chairman of Carni Sostenibili, and followed by a Q&A session with the audience.We look forward to welcoming you to this very special event!

*English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Polish


3 Febuary 2021: In case you missed it you can catch up on the lively discussions from our second European Livestock Voice debate from 28th January!

>> View the report online

— Or watch the entire Debate here

Join us for the second European Livestock Voice Debate!

In a jungle of labels, what is driving animal welfare practices?

28 January 2021
11:00 AM 

Animal welfare is an essential preoccupation for all actors in the livestock sector, as well as for consumers, and has led to debates at various levels, both national and European, including in the Farm to Fork strategy. As a consequence, various policies, standards and labelling schemes have sprouted from different sources like producers, NGOs, national or EU institutions… This debate will look at the impact on actual animal welfare and consumer confidence.


  • Inês Ajuda, Manager of the farm team at Eurogroup for Animals
  • Denis Simonin, Senior Expert on animal welfare at the European Commission’s DG on Health and Food Safety
  • Peter Sandøe, Professor of bioethics at the University of Copenhagen since 1997
  • Trine Vig Tamstorf, Chief policy advisor for animal health and animal welfare at the Danish Agriculture and Food Council

Download Speaker bios


Event report – #ELVDebates

8 December 2020: In case you missed it you can catch up on the lively discussions from our first-ever European Livestock Voice debate from 30 November.

>> View the report online

— Or download here

First-ever #ELVDebates!

Join us for the first-ever European Livestock Voice Debate: Is livestock really destroying the planet?

30 November 2020 from 2:00-3:15 PM – The livestock sector is blamed for all sorts of ailments, from CO2 emissions to unsustainable meat production, a supposedly « unhealthy » food. Numerous calls have been issued to curb livestock farming, meat consumption, etc. As we move to a greener future with a stronger focus on health, it’s time to examine both the pros and cons of livestock in a multifaceted debate. 


Exchange with the speakers and Q&A with the audience

We’re now on Twitter!

30 January 2020 – European Livestock Voice has just launched a Twitter account to spread some good news about EU Livestock and its contribution to a sustainable Europe.

Please follow us and engage with our tweets:

European livestock sector unites to ‘burst’ the myths surrounding the sector

10 December 2019 – Representatives from the European livestock sector gathered in front of the European Commission buildings in Brussels to address the danger of oversimplifying the debate around livestock and its role in European society. The flash action organised by European Livestock Voice and the Wallonian Farmers Association (FWA) echoes a number of concerns highlighted by the numerous protests that have taken place in different European countries in recent weeks. 
>> Read the full press release

Giving farmers a voice

20 November – In our latest activities we’ve been talking to some farmers, asking them what they think about peoples’ perceptions on livestock farming. In this video, Alexis Pugliese, a pig farmer from France talks about what he feels are the biggest misconceptions about his job. He also offers this thoughts on how farmers can take action to stop misinformation.


13 November: European Livestock Voice and supporting organisations sent MEPs a joint letter and declaration of support for the creation of a European Parliamentary Intergroup on “Livestock & livestock products”.

>>> Download the joint letter to MEPs
>>> Download the declaration of support for an EP Intergroup on Livestock and Livestock products

We’re in Brussels metro stations!

10 October – As getting peoples’ attention in a super-charged Brussels can sometimes be difficult, we thought some adverts in the Brussels metro stations might be a good way to turn some heads and challenge some thinking around livestock production in Europe.

With an artist’s portrayal of what a future without livestock would look like or what potential alternatives could mean, the posters are intended to make people think a little further than a simple ‘cut’ and ‘replace’. Livestock is a key contributor to so many elements in our lives, some of which we are not even aware. The intention of these visuals is to open discussion and invite reflection on the subject.

One visual focuses on the link between biodiversity and livestock, as livestock production is often blamed for negative impacts on biodiversity, while its contribution to the bioeconomy or circular economy is often overlooked.
A second visual presents a village square with different businesses having a dependency on livestock production, with the alternative image depicting potential rural desertification as a consequence of a ‘livestock exit’.
The third visual focuses on the question of current alternatives to meat production and their potential impact which is often absent from the debates on the future of food.

We encourage people to share their real-life livestock stories too and to get involved with making sure that everyone can #MeattheFacts!

Video launched

30 September – So after a few hiccups with uploading and some exchanges with Google over appropriate content – we’re just showing what others say – our campaign video is now live!
Today it’s easier to say what we don’t want and what we don’t like. It’s easy to put forward an opinion and to hit the headlines with striking images. The problem is, we tend to forget all about the knock-on effects of those opinions…….

Please watch, like, share and encourage others to share. And don’t forget to use the hashtag #MeattheFacts!

Launched and live in the European Parliament!

25 September 2019 – The livestock sector is today at the epicentre of public debates in Europe and beyond. These debates are now mainly dominated by interest groups who spread myths and radical views about livestock farming. Ever increasing on social media and in the press, these myths and opinions end up portraying a picture that is in stark contrast with the reality experienced and lived every day by thousands of European farmers and professionals on the ground. These debates have strong impacts on the views of European consumers on the role of animal products in their lifestyle choices and they push the livestock sector into an extremely defensive corner of society. This negatively affects the EU livestock farming model and policy framework, increasing the challenges faced by our farming communities to ensure their economic viability, generational renewal and their capacity to adapt to societal and environmental demands.

In this context, and for the first time at EU level, over a dozen livestock organisations have decided to come together to take joint action to elevate the “other side” of the story, necessary to restore balance and factual information on both the impact and the contribution of the European livestock sector. With this objective in mind, European Livestock Voice has developed its own information hub, an online portal reviewing the accuracy of the most frequently made statements about livestock production, consumption and its benefits:

NO – 1kg of beef does not require 15,000L of drinking water to be produced

YES – The average size for livestock farms in Europe is below 50 hectares and Europe remains a model of  family farming

NO – Using land for animal feed does not necessarily compete with land for human food

YES – European farmers care for their animals as it is fully in their interest to do so.

We are convinced that the EU livestock farming model, based on diversified, local and family farm structures, is the backbone of the EU’s rural areas. It supports a great number of jobs and industries, it contributes to the circular approach within the EU bioeconomy, while also ensuring a steady and affordable supply for sufficient, safe and nutritious food, as well as many other products and by-products, needed for a healthy lifestyle or Europe’s cultural and creative industries.

Removing livestock farming from Europe –  a “Livestock Exit” – would have severe consequences. Europe without livestock would lose essential pasture lands, face increased forest fires, lack greatly in organic fertilisers, green energy and many other essential raw materials while contributing to an increased rural exodus. At the same time, it would mean the need to rely on imports for animal products, with virtually no control over the production standards and increasing the demand for fossil fuel-based materials.

To support the launch of this initiative two newly appointed MEPs, also livestock farmers, Alexander Bernhuber (EPP, AT) and Jeremy Decerle (Renew Europe, FR) have decided to lead the debate in the new European Parliament by hosting the launch event of our platform today in Brussels.

For MEP Alexander Bernhuber the situation is clear “Today’s debate about livestock farming is often held on a lack of knowledge within the society. The gap between consumers and producers is getting bigger and bigger. European farmers produce at worldwide highest animal welfare standards. Nowadays the challenge is to communicate the essential work of our farmers via several channels to the consumer. European Livestock Voice created a significant platform to brighten this issue and fight against disinformation at European level. It is important to spread fact-based knowledge about today’s livestock farming within the media. Hence, I strongly support this initiative.

On his side, MEP Jérémy Decerle commenting on the initiative said that “As a breeder of Charolais cows, but also as a Member of the European Parliament (COM AGRI), I can only welcome the launch of such a European platform, specifically dedicated to livestock farming. It could help to dispel some preconceived ideas about this profession and bring a little pragmatism into the debates. At a time when Europeans want to eat healthier and more local food, but also to better preserve their environment, farmers can be part of the solution rather than part of the problem, and the search for solutions begins with a comprehensive and rational look at the situation.

MEP Clara Eugenia Aguilera García on her side commented “This initiative is a positive signal helping us in the European Parliament in our work to defend the EU livestock sector. The European livestock community works hard to ensure quality, sustainability and animal health and welfare. It has to be recognized while keeping a level playing field.  Given the ever-increasing number of misconceptions, more work is needed to restore a constructive and rational discussion around a sector so important to our rural areas, our environment and our future.”   

#MeattheFacts is ready for launch

European Livestock Voice is launching its first campaign with an aim of bringing some balance to the debate around our livestock sector which is playing centre-stage to a a large number of assumptions, accusations and far from accurate information amplifying on social media.

#MeattheFacts invites interested parties including EU policymakers and the press to check out some of the factual information we have compiled to respond to the main misinformation we have found online about livestock production in Europe.

You can also follow our hashtag #MeattheFacts on social media to find out what we’re doing. Feel free to share your real stories about livestock if you’re connected in any way!