Swiss community rejects more state compensation for crop losses

A majority of SRF’s dialog community opposes greater state compensation for crop losses caused by drought, according to a non-representative survey. About 61 percent of participants said farmers should adapt more effectively to climate extremes themselves.

The federal government and the cantons recently promised initial support measures for Swiss farms affected by extreme heat and drought. The debate asked whether stronger state compensation would be needed in the future.

Many participants argued that excessive compensation could slow the changes needed to make agriculture more resilient and climate-friendly. “Other professions are also suffering from global warming. And Swiss farmers are already heavily subsidised,” wrote a user under the pseudonym Tribun démocratique.

Some participants called for support to be directed instead towards farms moving away from monocultures and focusing more on quality than output. Others noted that agricultural and conservative political circles had repeatedly opposed environmental and climate protection measures.

Critics of stronger compensation also pointed to what they described as the long-standing downplaying or denial of climate change by agricultural and political groups. “The favourite party of farmers has played down these events for years and even called them untrue,” wrote a user named Tja Gedanken.

Other participants considered that argument cynical and supported compensation. “For the farmer, it is a question of his family’s survival,” wrote Daniel Hostettler. “That is why I think it is very important that we always help our people in Switzerland in an emergency. There is always enough money.”

Emhat Thaad argued that politicians had failed to anticipate the consequences of climate change and had not provided adequate solutions. The user said even a small contribution could help in a situation serious enough to justify compensation for crop losses and other damage caused by recurring heatwaves.

Oli Logograf said it was unrealistic to expect agriculture to adapt quickly to new temperature extremes. The federal government should have an interest in ensuring that as many farmers as possible survive, the user wrote, despite crop losses and additional costs for water. Food production, the user added, was one of the three most important things in life, alongside air and water.