When the nights draw in and the temperatures drop, Switzerland likes to fall back on hearty fare like rösti, raclette and fondue. The basic ingredients for these classics – milk and potatoes – are staples that have been sourced and eaten in our own country since time immemorial. Swiss-produced vegan cheese alternatives are now a viable option too.
Indeed, modern diets are now considerably more diverse than they used to be. Farmers still help to put food on our plates but trying to understand the money and trade flows that make Swiss agriculture tick means grappling with a dizzying array of figures. Besides our own personal preferences, it is a complicated web of direct transactions, subsidies, tariffs, import quotas, and a great deal more that dictates what we eat. Here are five questions (and answers) to make sense of it all.
1 Could Switzerland potentially be able to produce all the food it needs?
A 2025 study co-written by ETH Zurich agricultural ecologist Andreas Bosshard says yes. This conclusion surprised Bosshard himself. He and his co-authors think Switzerland could become completely self-sufficient. It could even produce enough food for over 10 million people, compared to 4.2 million today. Switzerland’s net self-sufficiency rate is currently around 50 per cent, or 57 per cent if you take imported animal feed into account. The initiative “for food security” (Food Security Initiative) wants Switzerland to hit 70 per cent.
Bosshard suggests nine measures that could be implemented without major monetary investment, the most important of which concerns livestock feed. Cattle should only graze on grass and not be fed concentrates and maize. Switzerland now devotes 60 per cent of its arable land to growing animal feed, while also importing concentrate feed. If cows fed on grass alone, this would free up large swathes of land to grow food for humans. Although it would lead to lower milk yields, demand would still be met given current levels of overproduction, the study says.
Food waste is another factor. By halving it, Switzerland could feed 1.8 million more people. We should also return to the practice of feeding food waste safely to pigs, not least because of the positive environmental effects, as it would help us to reach our carbon and ammonia reduction targets.
Yet the Swiss Farmers’ Union believes that full food self-sufficiency is completely unrealistic. During the Second World War, when only four million people lived in Switzerland and more agricultural land was available, self-sufficiency was around 70 per cent despite rationing, it argues.
The farming sector itself can only do a small amount of the things that are needed, Bosshard concedes. Most measures require the involvement of the food industry, retailers, and consumers, he says, adding that, since the Second World War, the state has, to a large degree, shaped and played a role in encouraging today’s consumption habits and behaviours, which are responsible for many of the inefficiencies in the food system. This particularly applies to animal-derived foods. For decades, at least 80 per cent of agricultural subsidies have gone into animal farming, with crop production receiving only 20 per cent.
In its 2022 report on the future direction of agricultural policy, the Federal Council also concludes that more arable land must be used to grow crops for direct human consumption to ensure that domestic food production keeps up with population growth. Yet 100 per cent self-sufficiency will not be possible despite all this, because many of the key resources needed in the Swiss farming sector are often imported. These include artificial fertilisers, pesticides, diesel, and seed.
2 How environmentally sustainable is Swiss agriculture?
In its most recent 2016 report on environmental goals for agriculture, the Federal Council painted a mixed picture on whether targets related to biodiversity, greenhouse gas emissions, phosphorous, and pesticides were being met. Environmental goals have not been reviewed systematically since then, with no study keeping track of progress. This significant lapse in knowledge makes obtaining a coherent overview impossible, say farming experts. The latest updates and analyses only relate to individual areas.
To receive direct subsidies, farms must fulfil a range of sustainability criteria. This mandatory standard (“proof of environmental performance”) is not stringent enough, counter environmental groups. The Swiss branch of the World Wide Fund for Nature notes that none of the government’s 13 environmental goals have been met.
According to the latest government assessment of farming practices and their environmental impact, too much nitrogen still ends up in sensitive ecosystems, despite levels falling. Ammonia levels are also down but still above the required target. The situation regarding pesticides is also less than satisfactory. Levels have dropped since 2019, but in rivers and streams they rose again in 2024. Parliament has already approved measures to halve the risks posed by pesticide use by 2027.
Imported food has a more detrimental impact on the environment than that of domestic produce, says the Swiss centre of excellence for agricultural research, Agroscope, citing potatoes as an example. Findings in Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Italy were used for comparative purposes. The results were less clear-cut in the case of animal products.
Biodiversity, on the other hand, has remained stable. This is positive news given its otherwise historic decline, the government wrote in its 2025 Agricultural Report. Biodiversity levels are nevertheless still very low.
There is, therefore, still a lot to do to improve environmental sustainability. According to a new Agroscope study, it is possible for the food system to be much more environmentally friendly, resulting in healthier diets and a higher rate of food self-sufficiency.
3 Is Switzerland a country of small farms?
By international standards, farms in Switzerland tend to be relatively small family businesses. The average size of a Swiss farm is 22 hectares of used agricultural area, which is considerably less than in most European Union countries.
There is no precise definition of what a small farm is, although a farm of 10 hectares or less is typically referred to as a smallholding or small-scale farm. Switzerland has 13,213 such farms (out of a total of 47,075 farms in 2024). Nearly five per cent of farms cover even less than a hectare.
Most farms (12,380 in 2024) are between 10 and 20 hectares, while seven percent of farms exceed 50 hectares. The traditional Swiss farm is primarily a family operation run on a full-time or part-time basis. All family members are typically involved, often across multiple generations.
Swiss agriculture has, however, been in a state of flux for quite some time. Around one to 1.5 percent of farms close every year. In 2025 alone, 805 farms went out of business. The land is usually taken over by neighbouring farms, hence the average agricultural area per farm is steadily increasing. Farms have increased in size by some 50 per cent since 2000.
4 To what extent does the state subsidise food production?
Switzerland pours huge subsidies into food production, and our farmers receive some of the highest levels of government support worldwide. This reflects a deliberate political strategy. Roughly half of every franc that a farmer makes comes from the state, either in the form of subsidies (e.g. direct payments) or through higher consumer prices caused by tariffs. Liberal think tank Avenir Suisse estimates that agricultural trade protection costs Switzerland nearly three billion Swiss francs a year. Added to this are federal contributions to support production and promote sales, such as cheese-making subsidies, which amount to about 500 million francs a year on top of 2.8 billion francs in direct payments (2024). Consequently, every person in Switzerland pays an average 300 francs of their own money in direct payments to the agricultural sector each year, as well as around 40 francs to the dairy industry, regardless of how much or little they consume. Some of the subsidies come with conditions, like protecting the countryside or promoting biodiversity.
Then we also have hidden subsidies. Economists point, for example, to the reduced VAT rates that apply directly to soil cultivation services like sowing and ploughing, and indirectly to food products. Food in Switzerland is subject to a reduced VAT rate of 2.6 per cent because it counts as a basic necessity. Given that food consumption is not spread equally across the population, this creates distortions that are inefficient and not necessarily fair. Higher-income households also benefit from the reduced rate, because the food they buy normally tends to be more expensive. Sometimes, they even end up benefiting more.
Economists believe these myriad subsidies and tax breaks not only distort the market by delaying structural changes but also have a negative climate and environmental impact. They doubt whether Switzerland could maintain a high degree of self-sufficiency during a crisis.
5 Is food a new religion?
According to the Food Security Initiative, Switzerland should produce more of its own food by growing more crops for human consumption. This quickly leads into an emotive debate. Food has become a religion of sorts. Not in the sense that it delivers answers to existential questions like life after death or where we came from. But for people who devote themselves to it, food generates a sense of identity going far beyond what is on the plate. Eating vegetarian or vegan can turn into a mindset that extends into many areas, just as eating meat has become a political statement for some. The way we eat can be about much more than diet: animal welfare, sustainability, environmental protection, climate change, lifestyle, individualism, even world views as a whole.
People no longer eat vegan, they are vegan. Or they are meat eaters. Naturally, we are talking about one of countless characteristics that define us. Hence, discussions about food preferences can quickly become heated. Another parallel with religion may be the ideological aspect, whereby people act according to strictly defined rules. In religion, they call it dogma.
Like religious belief, food too can engender a sense of community – where you feel connected to like-minded people and distance yourself from those who think differently. Until well into the 20th century, it was almost impossible for a Protestant and a Catholic to tie the knot. Such marriages were frowned upon. Nowadays, there are vegans who deem it impossible to be in a relationship with someone who eats meat.
There are vegans who are convinced that the way they eat is helping to save the planet. Some meat eaters firmly believe that eating as much meat as possible is their prerogative, arguing that they are merely doing what humans have always done. Sometimes they feel that non-meat eaters are taking the moral high ground and push back.
Much like religion, food can be redemptive – delivering health, purity, and moral integrity. This can complicate relations at the dinner table.
According to an ETH Zurich study, Switzerland could potentially produce enough food to feed over 10 million people.
The Swiss branch of the World Wide Fund for Nature notes that Switzerland’s environmental performance is poor.
By international standards, farms in Switzerland tend to be relatively small family businesses.
Switzerland pours huge subsidies into food production, and our farmers receive some of the highest levels of government support worldwide.
Switzerland pours huge subsidies into food production, and our farmers receive some of the highest levels of government support worldwide.
Aims of the Food Security Initiative
The Food Security Initiative seeks to increase to 70 per cent the extent to which domestic food production covers domestic food consumption. Ten years would be the timeframe for achieving this target. It would mean diets having to become more plant-based. The initiative also calls for the protection of groundwater resources as well as the promotion of a sustainable system of agriculture and food production. Behind the initiative are Franziska Herren from the Clean Water for All association plus a number of other people. Herren was also the driving force behind the Clean Drinking Water initiative that was rejected in June 2021. The Federal Council and parliament have rejected the Food Security Initiative without offering a counterproposal. Voters will offer their own verdict on 27 September.
(CF)
Comments