How Big Agriculture Lobbying Weakened EU Environmental Reforms

Newly revealed documents from inside one of Europe’s most powerful farming organisations show how lobbying helped delay, weaken and overturn major EU farming reforms.

The documents detail efforts to influence policies covering pesticide use, meat promotion, industrial farming, animal welfare and wolf protection.

Copa Cogeca describes itself as the voice of 22 million farmers across Europe. The organisation also has close access to EU lawmakers and has been described as a “partner in policymaking”.

According to documents obtained by Grilled, an investigative journalism project focused on food systems, and the Guardian, Copa Cogeca developed a detailed lobbying strategy in response to the EU’s proposed farming reforms.

The reforms were launched in 2020 as part of efforts to address climate change, biodiversity loss and the wider nature crisis.

Lobbying against pesticide reduction

One of the EU’s key proposals was to cut pesticide use by half.

The aim was to reduce pollution and protect biodiversity. However, Copa Cogeca responded with a combination of lobbying and delay tactics.

In September 2022, an internal note stated:

“The European parliament elections are in 2024,”

The note continued:

“Perhaps it is worth delaying until then. We must force the [European] Commission to abandon its objectives.”

Copa Cogeca then called for a new impact assessment of the proposed pesticide rules. The European Commission carried out the assessment later that year, delaying the policymaking process by six months.

The organisation also opposed a European parliament report on the policy. Members presented privately commissioned research about the potential economic impact of the reforms to EU ambassadors.

The minutes recorded that member states:

“showed understanding”.

The proposed pesticide regulation was eventually withdrawn in February 2024.

That happened only months before the European elections that Copa Cogeca had identified as a potential opportunity to delay the legislation.

The EU is now considering a proposal that would remove the requirement for periodic safety reassessments of pesticides already on the market.

Pressure to protect glyphosate and bee-harming pesticides

The documents also reveal lobbying over glyphosate and pesticides that can harm bees.

The World Health Organization’s cancer agency has classified glyphosate as probably carcinogenic.

Copa Cogeca instructed members to lobby for the renewal of glyphosate’s licence:

“Pressurise permanent representations to support” glyphosate’s licence renewal,

The secretariat also stated:

“Copa Cogeca will send a letter to permanent representations.”

Thomas Waitz, a Green MEP from Austria who sits on the agriculture committee, said:

“Copa Cogeca focused on sabotaging, delaying and ultimately killing the sustainable use of pesticides regulation. They are acting in the interest of large agrichemical multinationals and against the wellbeing of small and medium farmers.”

The dispute highlights a wider concern about the influence of agricultural lobbying on policies designed to reduce chemical pollution and protect wildlife.

Lobbying against restrictions on red meat promotion

Copa Cogeca also focused heavily on efforts to reduce the promotion of red and processed meat.

Each year, the EU spends hundreds of millions of euros promoting agricultural products. One example was the 2020 “Become a Beefatarian” advertising campaign, which attracted criticism from campaigners.

The European Commission later proposed restricting funding for the promotion of red and processed meat as part of its cancer plan.

Copa Cogeca viewed the proposal as a major threat.

At a meeting in January 2022, officials said:

“We are not talking here only about promotion policy,”

They added:

“If meat is treated in this way there, it will spread to other policies as well.”

Copa Cogeca coordinated three commissioners to challenge the guidance. It also brought wine and alcohol lobby groups into the campaign.

Members were encouraged to pressure their national governments to remove the proposed restrictions.

The following year, the measures were weakened. A year later, the health criteria were dropped.

Copa Cogeca described the outcome as:

“Lobbying has borne fruit.”

Industrial farms and pollution rules

The organisation also worked to weaken proposed rules covering industrial farms.

According to an internal memo from 2022, letters sent to senior commissioners helped increase the threshold for defining an industrial farm by 50%.

The threshold was based on the number of animals kept on a farm.

The change happened before the proposal was publicly released.

Analysis found that the change could cost the public €1.8bn (£1.5bn) each year through lost health benefits.

Copa Cogeca’s campaign went beyond private meetings.

Lawmakers were taken on organised farm visits in Belgium. Media campaigns were launched. Letters were sent to EU ambassadors before important European Council votes.

On the day of the final parliamentary vote, tractors and invited MEPs gathered outside the European parliament in Strasbourg.

A large screen showed the vote on the Industrial Emissions Directive, allowing those gathered to watch the proceedings live.

Weaker rules for intensive livestock farms

The final legislation was significantly weaker than the original proposal.

Thresholds for poultry and pig farms were raised. Cattle farms were excluded entirely.

Only around 1% of Europe’s cattle farms would have been covered by the original proposal.

Marco Contiero, agriculture policy director at Greenpeace EU, said Copa Cogeca had:

“chosen to shield a small group of highly industrialised operators responsible for a disproportionate share of pollution”

The changes raise important questions about how agricultural policy can balance the interests of farmers, large-scale producers, public health and the environment.

Animal welfare rules also weakened

Animal welfare was another major area of lobbying.

The documents suggest a difference between Copa Cogeca’s private discussions and its public position on cage farming.

At an internal meeting in 2021, an official said the industry could end caged farming immediately if it received financial support.

However, Copa Cogeca’s lobbying position called for a transition period of up to 15 years.

The European Commission is expected to announce plans to phase out cages for laying hens by the end of 2026.

That would come years after its original commitment.

The debate shows how the pace of animal welfare reform can be affected by competing economic and political interests.

Lobbying to reduce protection for wolves

Copa Cogeca also spent years campaigning to reduce the legal protection given to wolves under EU nature law.

Its own officials privately described the goal as:

“probably naive”

This was because the relevant directive had remained unchanged for 30 years.

However, the campaign eventually succeeded.

In September 2024, the organisation’s presidium declared:

“A major lobbying victory. The fight is over.”

The habitats directive was amended in June 2025.

Copa Cogeca’s documents show that the organisation then began identifying other animals and birds it wanted targeted.

What do the documents reveal about agricultural lobbying?

Taken together, the documents show the scale of lobbying around European farming and environmental policy.

The campaigns involved private meetings, political pressure, commissioned research, media activity and direct engagement with EU officials.

The policies affected some of the most important environmental issues facing Europe, including pesticide pollution, biodiversity loss, industrial farming, climate change and animal welfare.

Copa Cogeca did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

A spokesperson for the European Commission said its decisions were taken:

“on Europe’s terms, under Europe’s rules, and in the European interest”.

Delara Burkhardt, a German MEP on the environment committee, said:

“Big agri’s interest is not in simplifying the green deal,”

She added:

“It wants to dismantle it.”

Protecting nature from agricultural pollution

Agriculture plays a vital role in food production. Farmers also manage large areas of Europe’s land and countryside.

However, farming practices can have a major impact on wildlife, water quality, soil health and biodiversity.

Reducing harmful pesticide use, tackling agricultural pollution and supporting more sustainable farming methods can help create healthier ecosystems.

The documents revealed by Grilled and the Guardian highlight why strong environmental safeguards and transparent policymaking matter.

Taking Practical Action to Protect Wildlife

At Natural World Fund, we believe nature recovery requires practical action to restore habitats, protect wildlife and create healthier ecosystems for the future.