For debate in the Standing Committee — See Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure

Doc. 9504

15 July 2002

Introduction of a quality label for food products derived from hill farming

Report

Committee on the Environment and Agriculture

Rapporteur: Mr Renzo Gubert, Italy, Group of the European People’s Party

Summary

The Assembly is convinced of the need to ensure the sustainable development of mountain regions and, as one measure among others, proposes establishing a quality label for food products derived from hill farming.

Mountain produce has a very positive image with consumers, and introducing a quality label would be a means of enhancing the status of these products, making them better known among consumers and implementing quality controls.

I.       Draft recommendation

1.       The Parliamentary Assembly is aware of the need to promote the sustainable development of mountain regions on account of the diversity and the wealth of their resources.

2.       The Assembly considers that hill farming has a crucial role, not only in the economic and social development of mountain regions, but also, because of its multifunctional nature, in the quality of life of the lowland population..

3.       The Assembly points out that it actively concerns itself with food safety, security for consumers and food quality issues.

4.       The Assembly believes that promotion of high-quality food products derived from hill farming is of considerable importance to the future of mountain economies.

5.       The Assembly is heedful of the issues relating to mountain regions' development and has focussed on the question of protection of mountain regions, recommending the introduction of a quality label for mountain resorts in Europe (Recommendation 1433 (1999)).

6.       Setting up a quality label for food products derived from hill farming would be a means of enhancing these products' image with consumers, controlling their quality and guaranteeing legal protection against misuse of geographical names by agrifood companies in the mass-production sector. Such a quality label would not necessarily supersede other labels indicating local or regional origin, but could be added to them.

7.       The Assembly is convinced that the Council of Europe can aid the development of hill farming, given the activities it pursues, especially those undertaken by the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, and, in particular, in view of the final declaration of the Third European Conference of Mountain Regions, adopted in 1994.

8.       It believes that establishing a legal mechanism for the promotion and protection of food products derived from hill farming is consistent with a joint European approach to the challenges facing mountain regions, whether in the Alps and the Pyrenees, or in the Balkans, the Carpathians or the Caucasus.

9.       The Assembly considers that development of hill farming can also help to conserve natural and cultural environments, prevent natural disasters, protect water resources, guarantee a minimum population density in mountain areas and develop ecologically sustainable tourism.

10.       Having regard to the above, the Parliamentary Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers:

i.       introduce a quality label for products of hill farming, by putting forward general criteria covering both geographical boundaries and production conditions, and by inviting the member states, in particular, to put forward the proposals of national, regional and local administrative authorities and of producers from mountain areas;

ii.       invite the member states to harmonise their legislation on designations of origin and quality labels, making it possible for a label of origin to be introduced for hill farm products;

iii.       encourage the member states - possibly through awareness-raising exercises - to designate their mountain territories, define the criteria for the award of the quality label to a growing number of products and put the finishing touches to verification and monitoring machinery;

iv.       propose that the European Union add to existing methods of protecting designations of origin and the typical characteristics of agrifood products a geographical designation, which could even be used in combination with another designation, to identify mountain products;

v.       consider preparing a possible agreement enabling this quality label system to be extended to the European countries which are not members of the European Union, and invite these countries to move towards this objective, particularly those with common borders;

vi.       consider taking initiatives with a view to setting up a European body to guarantee, in co-operation with interested member states, co-ordinated management of the quality label for products of hill farming;

vii.       encourage member states to make use of existing European Union legal provisions in order to protect the designations of origin of their mountain regions’ agricultural and food products, if appropriate by concluding agreements with the European Union;

viii.       invite the World Trade Organisation to promote the transparency of farm and food product markets through the protection of the designations and labels which indicate products’ diversity and their specific characteristics derived from their places of origin (including mountain areas) and production processes;

ix.       invite member states and the European Union to increase the resources spent on research into the specific qualities of hill farming products, both at local level and in respect of a mountain range or of mountains in general;

x.       respond to the expectations of many Council of Europe member states and pay particular attention to the specific problems of mountain regions and hill farming.

II.       Explanatory memorandum by Mr Gubert

CONTENTS

 

6.       Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………..       ….91       .

1.        Introduction

1.       The United Nations General Assembly has declared 2002 International Year of Mountains (IYM). The objectives of IYM are, first and foremost, increasing knowledge and awareness of the problems of mountain areas, but also promoting sustainable development of mountain regions' resources, including hill farming, fostering a development dynamic, preserving and safeguarding the cultural heritage of mountain communities and guaranteeing their quality of life.

2.       Mountain regions account for some 30% of the European Union's land area, and about 20% of its agricultural land. Mountain areas cover more than 50% of some EU countries. Fifty million people also live and work in these regions.

3.       The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has always taken an interest in the problems facing mountain areas. It should therefore seize the opportunity offered by the International Year of Mountains to once again draw attention to the concerns of mountain regions in member states and present proposals for the sustainable development of these extremely fragile regions, whether in the Alps and the Pyrenees, or in the Balkans, the Carpathians or the Caucasus.

4.       A number of these problems are common to hill farmers everywhere. This therefore necessitates a joint European approach to the challenges confronting mountain regions, since an overall strategy can be adopted to pursue common objectives and implement shared cross-border policies.

5.       It must be said that, unlike lowland or valley farming systems, hill farming - apart from being a source of agricultural produce - is of special importance in:

6.       Compared with lowland farming, hill farming is to a large extent a poor relation for the following reasons: the topography is difficult, the land itself is fairly infertile and unproductive, and the climate is often harsh. Thus these disadvantages need to be offset in order to safeguard hill farming, not only as a source of quality produce, but also as a means of sustaining and developing the local social fabric and economy and protecting the environment.

 

7.       Population retention is a problem encountered in most mountain regions. The sector hardest hit by depopulation is farming, but when farming declines all other fields suffer the consequences in terms of environmental degradation and a downturn in economic activities.

 

8.       It must therefore be possible to build modern infrastructure and communication networks in mountain regions, to make use of the opportunities offered by information technology for bridging distances and reducing isolation, thereby encouraging young people to settle in these areas. To halt the exodus, the quality of life in mountain areas must be guaranteed.

 

9.       Liberalisation of agricultural production and globalisation, with all their negative economic and social implications, are going to create further problems for hill farmers. Mountain regions are not impermeable to innovations or to the new logic imposed by globalisation, but dialogue between local, regional and national authorities and European institutions is vital, in order to face the future fearlessly while respecting the diversity of mountain regions' traditions.

 

10       Conventions can prove an effective means of translating into action the idea of a Greater Europe of mountain regions. The Third European Conference of Mountain Regions held in Chamonix in 1994 adopted a Charter of Mountain Regions, which the Parliamentary Assembly subsequently approved. Conventions can define frameworks for joint strategies, with a view to solving the problems common to all hill farmers.

 

11.       From 1989-90 far-reaching changes took place in socio-economic systems in eastern Europe. Free market policies replaced the former system of central planning, and trade in farm products was completely liberalised. The first countries from this region are expected to join the European Union from 2004. Because hill farming in the candidate countries is at an even greater competitive disadvantage than lowland agriculture, there is a danger that it will become completely marginalised.

 

2.       Parliamentary Assembly activities in favour of mountain regions

 

12.       The Parliamentary Assembly has been concerning itself with the problems of mountain regions for over thirty years now. Its Agriculture Committee addressed these problems as early as 1968, pointing out the special nature of hill farming.

 

13.       Already in 1974, Mr Ahrens, a former President of the Parliamentary Assembly, and Mr Weber submitted a report introducing the concept of environmental protection for Alpine areas and warning of the dangers of abandonment of farms and uncontrolled urban development.

14.       In 1978 the Conference of Regions of the Alpine Arc took place in Lugano. It was the first conference of mountain regions to deal with the issue of overall spatial planning and consider the scope for co-operation between the regions concerned.

15.       In 1982 the Parliamentary Assembly and the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe held a conference on the Pyrenean regions in Jaca.

16.       In 1991 the Alpine Convention was adopted and opened for signature; it came into force in 1995.

17.       In 1993 the Parliamentary Assembly held a colloquy in Slovakia on the idea of a pan-European policy for mountain regions.

18.       During the following ten years, the Assembly organised many meetings on this subject with the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (CLRAE) (the then Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe). At the 2nd Conference of Mountain Regions (Trento, 1988), the Council of Europe was requested to “lay down the principles of a European policy for mountain regions in the form of a European charter with the status of a convention”.

  

19.       It was thus that the 3rd Conference of Mountain Regions (Chamonix, September 1994) adopted the draft European Charter of Mountain Regions, a text prepared by the Parliamentary Assembly in co-operation with the CLRAE and the fruit of six years' co-operation.  The draft Charter was adopted by the CLRAE in 1995 and by the Parliamentary Assembly during the same year. It was then forwarded to the Committee of Ministers which, in its turn, forwarded it to the European Conference of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning (CEMAT). The strong opposition of the latter to a legal instrument applicable exclusively to mountain regions, resulted in the only follow-up to day being the taking into account of the principles of the draft Charter in the “Guiding Principles for Sustainable Spatial Development of the European Continent”, adopted by the 12th Conference of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning (Hanover, September 2000).

3.       Hill farming

20.       The quality of food products is a primary concern for consumers, as can be seen from the growing success of organic produce. What are the specific characteristics of mountain produce? They are linked, first and foremost, to the natural environment, which has remained virtually unchanged over the years, whereas human beings have organised themselves in economic and social systems which have undergone constant change. With regard to the characteristics of mountain produce, emphasis must also be laid on the quality of the raw materials and on farmers' know-how.

21.       The first way of enabling consumers to familiarise themselves with the specific qualities of mountain produce is therefore to distinguish products according to local origin, as is already done to some extent. However, this may not suffice in an ever more globalised world where specific local, especially mountain, characteristics can be so numerous that it becomes difficult for consumers to distinguish between mountain produce and others.

22.       It is therefore important to give additional information by reference to more extensive and better known areas of origin. Such information may relate to region or to country of origin, but, where mountain produce is concerned, it is important also to indicate the mountain area of origin itself. This is a way of drawing attention to diversity, which may be differently perceived according to the level at which the market is organised: local, regional, national, continental or global.

23.       The advantages for producers and consumers respectively of providing and receiving information about the diversity of the qualities of produce according to geographical origin will be longer-lasting if differences in quality are guaranteed and documented by scientific studies and by certification. These may, in practice, identify some quality parameters enabling the characteristics of produce to be defined and monitored through effective institutional machinery. In this context, it is worth emphasising how little scientific research is directed towards finding quality parameters capable of defining the specific properties of produce linked to its geographical area of production.

24.       According to a consumer survey carried out some years ago, four criteria can be seen to contribute to perception of a food product as quality mountain produce: low production volumes, use of solely natural ingredients, use of traditional techniques, and non-industrial production. It is clear that if only these four criteria are applied to define quality mountain produce, there is a risk of restricting the number of products that might qualify for this designation.

 

25.       Mountain produce has a very positive image among consumers. The Committee on the Environment and Agriculture has dealt with these issues on a number of occasions and has expressed the opinion that the status of hill farmers' products should be enhanced through the creation of a "quality label" or seal of approval, which would make these products better known to consumers. This could also be a guarantee of quality and identified origin and facilitate more effective marketing of these products. It was along these lines that Mr Robol tabled a motion for a recommendation on 19 January 2000 (Doc. 8621).

 

26.       In hill farmers' view the only way of safeguarding the positive image of mountain produce is to lay down rules intended to guarantee respect for the specificities of mountain regions (criteria already exist at European Union level for compensating their natural disadvantages) allowing them to benefit from EU funds for support measures for a quality policy concerning mountain produce.

 

27.       It would be very helpful, especially following the Council's enlargement to the countries of eastern Europe and in the context of the expected enlargement of the EU, to foster pooling of experience by mountain regions at a pan-European level, with the objective of promoting solidarity and a hill farming culture.

 

28.       A policy for supporting mountain produce would also be a means of restoring hill farmers' public image, showing that hill farming has a future and is not an activity in decline pursued in disadvantaged areas, but one which makes an important contribution to the sustainable development of these regions.

 

29.       During the Committee on Agriculture’s Colloquy on Hill Farming, held in Riva del Garda in October 2000, mention was made of the potential offered by the Internet as a means of informing the public with a view to reversing the tendency to perceive mountain regions as disadvantaged areas and facilitating the marketing of quality mountain produce.

 

30.       The question is how can quality agrifood products, farm tourism services and forestry and other products give an impetus to sustainable development in mountain regions. Is a quality strategy sufficient in itself to ensure sustainable development of hill farming or must thought be given to other aspects?

31.       Genuine sustainable development occurs if at least three factors are present. The first is the economic factor: the economy has a role in ensuring a better return on mountain products, which must be distinguishable from the mass of other products. If that is achieved, consumer and producer can also be brought closer together, and the same diversity of products maintained, a diversity which would otherwise be destined to be swallowed up by mass production. The second is the social factor: it is important for people who live in mountain regions to have a guarantee that their opportunities for social relationships and for cultural communication, as well as their access to public and privately-run services, are not too greatly inferior to those available in urban or lowland areas. The third factor encompasses the environment, its protection and biodiversity. The environmental stewardship and maintenance of biodiversity which result from the presence of a mountain population, particularly arable and stock farmers, are positive for the community as a whole, which must be recognised and rewarded, thereby becoming a stable part of the development model of mountain communities.

 

32.       Although there is a consensus concerning the need to ensure sustainable development, one still has to be aware that the diversity of situations in mountain regions necessitates different development approaches, with possibilities for sustainable interaction between sectors. Tourism is a good example, since it helps to promote quality local produce. Another example is forestry, with its impact on water and air quality and the landscape, offering opportunities for leisure activities, for hunting, etc. All this also helps to create jobs.

 

33.       Although it is clear that the quality of mountain produce is a major factor in sustainable development, it is but one aspect among others. It needs to be integrated into other aspects, under a general plan for the area. The territorial dimension can create awareness of a shared identity, a strong link between people, thus providing a basis for the capacity to enhance the positive aspects of life in certain areas and to offset its negative aspects. Consequently, sustainable development is also pursued at a local level.

34.       In mountain regions in central and eastern Europe, farming conditions are unfavourable. As a result the products cost more, which acts as a restraint on output. Until the late eighties the prevailing socio-economic system in these countries entailed nationalisation of land and the elimination of privately owned smallholdings, with implementation of a central planning policy. This centralised system of agricultural production resulted in a particularly difficult situation in mountain regions, where production costs are high and farm revenues are 30-50% lower than in lowland areas.

35.       From 1990, these countries found themselves confronted with the difficulties of transition. Most chose to replace the former centralised system with a completely free market. The problems of hill farming were not regarded as a priority, and there are few countries in central and eastern Europe with a well-defined policy for the development of mountain areas and hill farming.

 

36.       This is a cause for concern in the context of EU enlargement. The European Parliament's resolution of 13 July 2001 confirms this when it calls on the European Commission "in relation to the mountain regions, to develop a logical plan for structural support … which takes account of enlargement".

4.       The food product labelling policy of the European Union 

37.       On 14 July 1992, the EU Council adopted Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs, the aim of which is to lay down common rules in this sphere in order to enhance the value of certain specific quality goods produced in a particular geographical area. This Regulation also seeks to diversify agricultural production in a wider context of sustainable rural development. It was subsequently modified on 17 March 1997. The scope of the Regulation and the list of products concerned are determined by the Commission. For this purpose a committee was set up, composed of representatives of the member countries and one representative of the Commission.

38.       The Regulation provides for two types of label:

39.       Eligibility for either of these labels depends on compliance with specifications relating to the name and description of the of the product, the geographical area, production methods, key elements of the geographical environment. Other information required includes particulars of the supervisory bodies and regulations to be complied with. The nature of the link between the product and the geographical place is more strict, as are the features due mainly or exclusively to the geographical region.

40.       Another important aspect of food product labelling is the registration procedure. An application for registration may be made by any group of producers, whatever its legal form, or – in exceptional cases – by a single corporate body or individual. The member state, on receiving the application, checks it and forwards it to the Commission and the member states. The application is then considered by the Commission and published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. If there is no objection within three months, the label is registered. If there is an objection, the Commission examines the grounds before reaching a decision.

41.       Third countries can also apply for registration of a label according to the same procedure. Registered labels enjoy legal protection against improper use or fraudulent claims. The Commission is authorised to negotiate agreements with third countries for mutual protection of registered labels.

42.       In 1992, the European Union set up a scientific committee on designations of origin and geographical indications. This committee advises the Commission on all technical issues relating to the registration of names of agricultural products and foodstuffs and to disputes between the member states.

43.       Another important element in EU labelling policy relates to ecology. An ecological label was introduced in 1992. In 2000, the European Parliament and the Council revised the Community system, which is intended:

 

44.       The Community’s policy of promoting the diversity of products through Protected Designations of Origin (PDOs), Protected Geographical Indications (PGIs) and Traditional Specialities Guaranteed (TSGs) is still incomplete in a globalised market. This remains the case while this policy has no influence on the international regulations of the World Trade Organization (WTO), based on the liberalisation of trade. Following the 4th WTO Ministerial Conference (held in Doha, Qatar, in November 2001), a cycle of negotiations was started in which the European Union is proposing to emphasise the quality and specific nature of farm produce so as to find, in a global context, appropriate forms of protection from the unauthorised use of names of farm and food products, protection which guarantees the right to use geographical indications or designations of origin.

45.       In this respect, the TRIPS Agreement on the commercial regulation of intellectual property rights , in the context of which the issue of labels and designations of origin is being tackled within the WTO, is not proving very appropriate, for farm produce occupies only a highly marginal place in it.

46.       Consequently, the EU has requested that the subject of the protection of product quality and the measures intended to promote the image of produce be included as a specific item in the agriculture negotiations, thereby obtaining from the WTO both its first recognition of the multifunctional role of agriculture and an initial consideration of the problem of the protection of produce covered by geographical indications and designations of origin. By the end of the 5th Ministerial Conference, scheduled for 2003, the multilateral system for notification of geographical indications for wines and spirits will have been decided.

5.       Creation of a quality label

 

47.       Firstly, some general principles need to be determined as a basis for devising and awarding a quality label for mountain food products. That is necessary in order to ensure that the positive aspects of the idea outweigh the potential risks. Such principles might be as follows 

 

48.       It is obviously not possible to give an exhaustive list of principles here. The following are some proposals :

The local authorities :

 

The national authorities :

The Council of Europe :

 

49.       The creation of a quality label for mountain farm food products is in line with EU policy. European Parliament Resolution (2000/2222(INI)) urges the Commission to define a quality label consistent with the relevant European standards to designate produce from mountain areas.

6.       Conclusions

50.       The United Nations General Assembly has declared 2002 International Year of Mountains. In the course of the Year, the Parliamentary Assembly invite the Committee of Ministers to resume consideration of the outline convention on mountain regions. Such a legal instrument would be particularly useful in the light of the serious problems facing mountain regions in eastern Europe during a difficult transition period.

51.       The introduction by the European Union of a quality label for food products derived from hill farming would be an important step, which could contribute to the sustainable development of farming in mountain areas and, after enlargement, would concern a greater number of European countries.

  

52.       The Council of Europe might in turn both contribute expert advice and help to harmonise legislation in this field, particularly in the countries of eastern Europe, and encourage the exchange of experience between mountain regions in the member states. It might also, in agreement with the interested countries, help to promote the setting up of a European quality label management body, in the event that the European Union does not wish to include a quality label for hill farm produce in its instruments protecting designations of origin.

*

* *

Reporting committee: Committee on the Environment and Agriculture.

Reference to committee: Doc. 8621 and Reference No. 2480 of 3 April 2000.

Draft recommendation adopted unanimously by the committee (in accordance with Article 46.4 of the Rules) on 14 June 2002

Members of the committee: Mr Martinez Casañ (Chairman), MM. Behrendt, Hornung, Stankevic (Vice-Chairmen), Mr Agius, Mrs Agudo (Alternate: Mr Padilla), MM. Akçali, Akselsen, Mrs Angelovicova, MM. Annemans, Apostoli, Bartos, Bockel, Briane, Browne, Carvalho, Sir Sydney Chapman, MM. Churkin, Ciemniak (Alternate: Giertych), Cosarciuc, Duivesteijn, von der Esch, Etherington, Frunda, Giovanelli, Gonzalez de Txabarri (Alternate: Fernandez Aguilar), Graas, Grachev, Grignon, Grissemann, Gubert, Hajiyeva, Haraldsson, Ilascu, Janowski, Juric, Kalkan, Mrs Kanelli, MM. Kharitonov, Lord Kilclooney, MM. Kostenko, Kostytsky, Kurucsai, Kurykin, Lachat, Libicki, van der Linden, Lotz, Manukyan, Mariot, Mauro, Meale, Monteiro, Müller, Oliverio, Podobnik, Pollozhani, Popov, Salaridze, Mrs Schicker, MM. Schmied, Skopal, Skoularikis, Ms Stoejberg, Mr Stoica, Ms Stoyanova, MM. Theodorou, Timmermans, Tiuri, Truu, Vakilov, Velikov, Volpinari, Yürür, Mrs Zetterberg, Mr Zierer.

N.B. The names of those members present at the meeting are printed in italics.

Secretariat to the committee: Mrs Cagnolati, Mr Sixto and Ms Odrats.