In a time of environmental regulation backsliding in agriculture, how can grassroots, participatory processes enable farmers, environmentalists, and other local stakeholders to effectively shape policy?
As Brussels gives Member States increasingly more space to decide how to implement the CAP in their territories, the role of local actors is more critical than ever in raising national ambitions —with local food provisioning, for example, offering much potential—here, we dig deeper into a case study of a grassroots, participatory process.
The Social Water Roundtable of Andalusia (MSA) works to shape regional water governance in agriculture through multi-stakeholder dialogue.
Doñana National Park, a Natura 2000 wetland in the south of Spain, found itself at the centre of a socio-ecological conflict this year, when 250 farms were ordered to shut down for illegally exploiting the Park’s aquifers. Keen to depolarise the debates around a fair water distribution for irrigation in the region, key stakeholders have been coming together under the umbrella of the MSA since 2017 to develop a common vision.
Report by Irene Perez.
Background – How can the new 27-speed CAP be sustainable?
The new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) proposal put forward in July integrates agricultural and environmental funding with other priorities, such as defence and security, in an overarching National and Regional Partnerships (NRP) Fund. According to this proposal, as of 2028, each Member State would choose how to allocate funding in its National and Regional Partnership Plan, where the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) would form one chapter.
While €293.7 billion of direct CAP payments to farmers would be ringfenced in the proposed NRP Fund, agricultural ministries would potentially need to compete with other ministries for rural development funding previously guaranteed under Pillar 2. This means that agri-environmental climate measures (AECMs) —the main tool to fund long-term sustainable practices on farms— would no longer have dedicated funding. In parallel, the existing environmental conditionalities (GAECs) would be replaced with a looser system of “farm stewardship”.
The MFF proposal also raises pressing questions about how other environmental regulations directly impacting agriculture will be financed. During the Nature Restoration Regulation trialogues (June 2022 – June 2024), farmer representatives stressed the need for dedicated funding —in addition to CAP payments— to implement the Regulation in agriculture. This was one of the recommendations of the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture, which explicitly called for a Nature Restoration Fund.
Though the Dialogue began as an innovative way to place stakeholders at the heart of EU agricultural policymaking, many of its environmental demands were weakened in the resulting Vision for Agriculture and Food. The Nature Restoration Fund proposal was dropped and, so far, it is up to individual Member States to decide how to finance the Regulation’s requirements in their National Restoration Plans.
Looking inward: The importance of grassroots processes in shaping national CAP implementation
In this context of CAP nationalisation and environmental backsliding, the role of subnational stakeholders in raising ambition is more critical than ever. While grassroots participatory processes often have less direct influence on EU policy, their strong connection to on-the-ground realities allows them to generate concrete solutions that can be key in national policy implementation.
Taking the example of Spain, water governance is one of the most polarising issues in agriculture. The agricultural sector uses around 80% of national water resources, and the southern region of Andalusia surpasses this national average (for example 86% in the Guadalquivir, the main basin in Andalusia, in 2021). Known as the ‘vegetable garden of Europe’, Andalusia is a leading exporter of high-value, water-intensive crops such as tropical fruits. Paradoxically, Andalusia is also one of the driest regions in Spain and Europe, a problem aggravated by increasing hydrological variability due to climate change. This not only has economic consequences for farmers when irrigation restrictions are imposed under Special Drought Plans, but also environmental consequences.
The case of Doñana National Park epitomises this: a Natura 2000 site whose aquifers have been overexploited mainly for the irrigation of berry crops. In 2021, the EU Court of Justice ruled against Spain for failing to protect Doñana under the Water Framework and Habitats Directives. In 2025, the Prosecutor’s Office of the National Court called for the Ministry of the Ecological Transition to shut down 250 farms that have exploited the Park’s aquifers illegally. Prior to this, the national government had reached an agreement with the regional government of Andalusia in 2023, known as the Doñana pact, whereby the State would subsidise farmers to improve their practices and/or renaturalise their lands around Doñana. So far, a first tender of €28.5 million will cover up to 400 hectares, but the complex interaction between these incentives and the sanctions imposed by the Prosecutor’s Office is yet to play out.
Against this political backdrop, key stakeholders in water management and agriculture in Andalusia have come together to depolarise the debate and develop joint positions on water governance issues.
Co-producing a vision for socio-ecologically just agriculture
The Social Water Roundtable of Andalusia (Mesa Social del Agua de Andalucía – MSA) platform brings together farmer representatives, environmental NGOs, academics, trade unions and rural development organisations. For eight years, it has worked to promote the fair distribution of irrigation water across Andalusia.
Through email threads and a WhatsApp group, the MSA has been meeting physically or virtually every few months to develop joint positions on different water planning and management processes, such as the River Basin Management Plans. These positions and more detailed policy reports are published on the MSA website and shared publicly through social media and stakeholder networks.
Although it has no formal rules of procedure, the platform follows an informal principle: members may decide not to sign a joint position if it conflicts with their internal policies. This flexibility makes collective advocacy possible without forcing uniformity.
As a result of this work, the MSA identified the need to develop indicators to quantify how water could be redistributed at the basin level based on social, environmental and territorial criteria. Through a series of workshops organised by its member FNCA (New Water Culture Foundation) and supported by an external facilitator, participants worked on the definition and weight of indicators under the following themes:
- Social/economic,
- Water consumption,
- Rootedness in the territory
- Type of production.
Using a consent-based decision-making approach, they also defined governance requirements to enable the implementation of these indicators. This co-production of indicators was funded by the European Climate Foundation under the TRANAGRO project, which began in November 2024 and will end in October 2025. (FNCA is currently looking for funding opportunities to continue the project, for instance, with the development of ranges for each indicator.)
What’s next?
In the coming months, the MSA members who participated in the TRANAGRO project will present the results through a joint outreach strategy. This will include meetings with the river basin authorities (Hydrographic Confederations) to advocate for incorporating the indicators into water allocation methodologies in the River Basin Management Plans.
By gathering all the relevant stakeholders at the regional level, the MSA has been able to produce tangible policy solutions that directly address local realities. These include a proposal of regressive payments for the reforestation, return to rainfed farming or conversion to organic farming around Doñana. In doing so, the platform has fostered trust and mutual understanding between actors that often clash at the European level, such as farmers’ unions and environmental NGOs.
Grounded in co-production, the MSA’s work shows how grassroots processes can build shared co-responsibility to shape governance at regional and national levels. The challenge now lies with policymakers: To recognise the value of these initiatives and ensure they inform the transition towards fairer and greener agriculture.
TRANAGRO project participants come from COAG Andalucía, UPA Andalucía, CCOO Andalucía, UGT Andalucía, FACUA Andalucía, Fundación Savia, and FNCA.
More
Rise for Food Justice – Join the European Days of Action 2025!
Op-Ed | From Declaration to Action – Rethinking Rural Power in EU Policymaking
France | Not Perfect, But Possible – Seeing is Believing at Institut de Tramayes
Op-Ed | Farmland Sees the Less Sunny Side of Germany’s Solar Transition
European Rural Parliament 2025 — Rural Community Solutions to Global Challenges
The EU Has the Funds but Lacks Focus – This Farm Shows What’s Possible with Both
Rural Resilience | Water, Diversification and Agroecology – Part 1
Rural Resilience | Water, Diversification and Agroecology – Part 2
Rural Resilience | Water, Diversification and Agroecology – Part 3
The Rise of a New Grain Alliance – Germany’s Free Bakers Sow the Seeds of Change
Letter From The Farm | A Flamenco Approach to Rural Resilience
Letter From The Farm | Cooking With The Lights Off – Ingredients of Rural Resilience
Letter From The Farm | Rural Digitalisation Remains a Hard Sell
Water as a Common Good .. and climate risks, a common destiny – Part 2/2
When Policy Fails, People Step Up – Inside ARC’s Rural Resilience Project
