Society and regional strategies 3 min

USDA assessment of European strategies associated to the Green Deal gives pessimistic view due to a simplistic approach

A study carried out by the Economic Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture simulated the consequences of the European Farm to Fork and Biodiversity 2030 strategies on agricultural production and world markets. But the results of the study, which are generally negative, are limited in scope, since they only take into consideration changes in agricultural production conditions and market repercussions. INRAE experts wrote a note that aims to expose the limits of the study with a view to avoiding misguided interpretations of the consequences of the European Green Deal as a whole.

Published on 09 December 2020

illustration USDA assessment of European strategies associated to the Green Deal gives pessimistic view due to a simplistic approach
© INRAE C. Maître

The European Farm to Fork (1) and Biodiversity 2030 (2) strategies are an integral part of the Green Deal (3) which aims in particular to achieve carbon neutrality in Europe by 2050. The strategies are also in line with the sustainability goals adopted by the United Nations in 2015 (4). The Economic Service of the US Department of Agriculture carried out a study to evaluate the impact of these policies on agricultural production and world food prices, and therefore on global food security (5).

USDA findings on study: a pessimistic view

The USDA report examined three scenarios for adopting the European strategies:

  • Adoption by the European Union (EU) only
  • Adoption by some countries, and explicit EU trade restrictions against non-adopting countries
  • Global adoption

The USDA report predicts a 7% drop in agricultural production in the EU by 2030 and increased world food insecurity.

In all three cases, the report deems the impact on global food security to be negative, due to a drop in agricultural production and a concomitant rise in global prices. A decrease in production is linked to the goals laid out by the European Commission (EC), namely: cutting back on nitrogen fertilizers by 20% and pesticides and antibiotics by 50%, and decreasing farmland by 10%. According to the USDA, agricultural production in the EU would fall by 12% (adoption by UE) and 7% (global adoption). The number of people exposed to food insecurity in 2030 would jump by 22 million (adoption by UE), and up to 185 million (global adoption).


INRAE analysis: USDA study fails to look at full picture

A group of INRAE experts analysed the USDA study and showed that it fails to take into account all aspects of the European strategy. Indeed, it is based on an American model (6) that focuses on supply and markets, all other things being equal, and fails to include other parameters such as changing agricultural practices and food demand.  

  • Drops in agricultural production

The USDA scenarios fail to factor in technological advances in their simulations. It is reasonable to expect that strides made in genetics will result in crops and livestock animals that are more resistant to biotic and abiotic stress by 2030.

The USDA study calculates the decrease in production that would result from EC targets for each agricultural product. But this calculation is made assuming that agricultural systems will remain unchanged. However, European strategy calls for a profound change of these systems, toward more efficient use of inputs, agroecological practices that rely less on inputs, and genetic improvements in plant and animal species.   All of these change levers would mitigate drops in agricultural production linked to a decrease in chemical inputs and a reduction in farmland.  

  • Rising world prices

When demand is constant or growing, a drop in production automatically triggers a spike in prices. But in a coherent approach to agrifood systems, European strategy encourages lower demand, thanks to reduced calorie content and western diets less rich in animal products. The USDA report takes neither these changes in diet nor a reduction in food waste encouraged by the EC into account.

  • Environmental and health costs of current practices left out of the equation

Lastly, the USDA report does not take into account the environmental and health costs of current agricultural practices (e.g. nitrogen, pesticides), which are significant and subject to more and more precise evaluations.


  1. Farm to fork strategy
  2. 2030 Biodiversity strategy
  3. European Green Deal
  4. United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
  5. USDA-ERS: United State Department of Agriculture - Economic Research Service. Read the report here
  6. GTAP-AEZ model Global Trade Analysis Project - AgroEcological Zone: model for general equilibrium of world economy developed by Purdue University.

INRAE note on USDA-ERS study.pdfpdf - 109.81 KB

Pascale Molliertranslated by Inge Laino


Guy Richard

Chantal Le Mouël


Jean-Christophe BUREAU



Learn more

Society and regional strategies

“Terre en jeu": a training game to support territorial dynamics affecting agricultural land

To facilitate an understanding of the results of its research on the preservation of peri-urban agricultural land, carried out in the context of the ANR JASMINN project, Camille Clément (a postdoctoral scientist in Joint Research Unit for Innovation, based at the INRA Centre in Montpellier) has designed a game that also incites reflection on the issue of access to agricultural land. In this article, she explains the origins of this role play, how to play it and what it can contribute to both players and to research.

29 January 2018

Society and regional strategies

Ici.C.Local, a system to serve regional food policies and strategies

Created by INRAE and the Grabels municipal council, Ici.C.Local is a participatory system which enables the simple labelling in food shops of local short-circuit products that comply with certain sustainability criteria. Protected by a brand name registered by INRA, this system is now entering a new stage, that of its deployment through the creation of a collective structure that will support local partners regarding its implementation.

25 October 2018