The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) delivered a new policy statement called “Strategy for Sustainable Food Systems MIDORI” in 2021, effective immediately. The policy is an answer from MAFF and administration on agricultural policy to the Carbon Neutral Declaration of Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga in 2020 that he regarded as one of the main targets of his administration, and declared it as such at international conferences. The document includes a declaration of policy goal to expand the acreage of organic farming up to 25% of total farmland. This goal of one million ha. by 2050 surprised many people. We indicate problems of the policy by observing that two years that has passed since its announcement. The problem that we indicate as our conclusion is as given below. First, there is no evidence to make the policy goal realistic. Second, the actions and operations of MAFF should show remarkable changes as they intend to shift policy toward organic farming drastically, however we do see any change yet. Third, we are not able to agree with the basic understanding on the pathway to make organic farming the major farming style in Japan by the so-called MIDORI strategy, that focuses mostly on innovation/inventing new technology; we conclude it is the wrong policy for this farming revolution.

The new Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union, started from 2023, set special goals to facilitate transition towards more sustainable food systems of Member States. The contribution of organic farming to the goal is expected to be high, but actual development of organic sector is still far from the target (25% of organic land in the EU by 2030). Therefore, more holistic policy approaches to expand organic farming are needed. Denmark, as the focal country of this paper, has been a pioneer to support organic farmers as well as other stakeholders in the organic supply chains. The aim of this paper is to explore Denmark’s policy approaches with special focus on “push policy” for organic conversion and “pull policy” for organic market expansion. In Denmark, the “push policy” includes direct payments to farmers who switch to organic farming and maintain organic practices, and free organic certification system, while the “pull policy” covers various forms of support for further development of domestic and international organic markets, and programmes to support them, e.g. having school canteens serve more organic meals. This paper concludes that the Danish policy approaches of having both “push” and “pull” strategies have helped the country expand their organic farming programme successfully.

This paper focuses on the promotion of organic farming and agri-environmental policy in Austria. Austria has the highest percentage of organic farmland in the EU, and is one of the leading countries in organic production and consumption. The organic food market has been growing every year and many consumers choose organic food for their own health. One of the reasons for the increase in organic farming is the government subsidies. Austria mainly uses push strategy, so that it plays an important role in increasing the number of organic farmers that receive organic farmer subsidies before EU accession and the Agri-environmental Programme for an Environmentally Sound Agriculture (ÖPUL) after EU accession. The background to the development of agri-environmental policy is the eco-social agricultural policy introduced by Josef Riegler. This concept emphasises that three objectives— economic efficiency, ecological balance, and efforts to create social conditions— are of equal importance, and has strengthened support for organic farming. In Austria, there is a consensus in support of organic farming because many people recognize the value of agriculture and regard farmers as important for shaping the landscape and providing delicious produce.

Global sustainability challenges, such as climate change, are creating more consensus around the necessity to transition to sustainable farming methods and localized systems of production and consumption. In the European Union, conversion to organic farming is now seen as crucial to achieve sustainability goals. Italy, in particular, is one of the leading countries in terms of the number of organic farms and farmland, and has recently enacted legislation recognizing ‘organic districts’ as forms of territorial organization focused on organic production. This article provides an overview of recent organic farming developments in Italy, highlighting the implications for Japan. Despite socio-cultural differences, Italy and Japan both have a high percentage of small-scale farms in mountainous and hilly areas. The two countries also face similar challenges, such as the low profitability of conventional small-scale farming, aging farming populations, and farmland abandonment. Unlike Japan, however, Italy has been more successful in adopting organic farming, also thanks to the positioning of organic agriculture as a tool for rural revitalization and the survival of small farms. The conclusions underscore lessons that Japan could draw from Italy’s experience in promoting sustainable agriculture and rural development, especially following the introduction of Japan’s Strategy for Sustainable Food Systems (MIDORI).

Within the European Green Deal, the Biodiversity and Farm-to-Fork strategies aim to combat biodiversity loss and foster a shift towards a sustainable food system by 2030. This text explores two controversies that emerged after their publication. Firstly, it delves into the academic debate surrounding the framings of food and the policy implications resulting from whether food is conceptualized as a commodity or a common good. Secondly, the war in Ukraine prompted controversial public debates on food security. While farmers and industry advocated for relaxing agroecological ambitions, thousands of scientists argued for maintaining them to ensure food security. These controversies can be seen as a litmus test for the resilience and adaptability of the Farm-to-Fork and Biodiversity strategies. The geopolitical crisis slowed but did not reverse the sustainability transition. In the next years, the ambition among EU member states’ strategic plans will determine if the Common Agricultural Policy can serve as a pivotal lever for realizing the EU Green Deal’s target of becoming the first climate-neutral continent.

Scaling up agroecology in the United States means setting the stage for agroecology to first exist. The concept remains largely foreign in American policymaking, for a number of reasons. Political, cultural, geographic, and economic challenges persist in stymieing agroecology as an integrated pillar of American agriculture. At the same time, the federally-regulated Organic label continues to grow and presents a potentially powerful policy lever to advance agroecology. Whether through international trade agreements, participatory citizen rulemaking, or the ongoing project of consumer and policymaker education, the National Organic Program in the United States and the standardization of organic regulations across the Global North represent a political opportunity for agroecology, in all its regional diversity.

In May 2021, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries launched the Strategy for Sustainable Food Systems in Japan. The strategy’s goals are similar to those of the Farm-to-Fork Strategy in the European Union (EU). However, while the EU has 2030 as the year of completion, the Japanese goal of 2050 does not appear to be imminent. Here, I explore the context behind this difference compared with European countries. First, Japan has mountainous terrain with narrow plains, and suitable land for agricultural production is in intense competition with urban usage. Consequently, agricultural production must have higher land productivity, and a high-input production system has developed. Since the Agricultural Basic Act was adopted in 1961, improving the efficiency of agricultural production and increasing productivity have been flagship policy goals that are yet to be achieved. Second, traditional consumer-supported agricultural schemes have set high standards for agricultural protection. Direct payments play a less important role in incentivizing farmers to adopt environmentally sustainable practices. Third, the 2050 targets rely on technological progress based on eco-efficiency and input substitution, and not on the redesign of the agricultural system. Techniques and farming practices that result in reduced yields are difficult to accept. The main driving force toward the shift to agroecology is the pressure from international forums.