“I’d rather throw away the harvest than pay us 80 cents per kilo of tomatoes.” Almost a year ago, Riojan farmer Clara Sarramián gave an interview to Jaime Gumiel that still kicking. Above all, because it explains in a simple and accessible way the last five years of tractor units.
And yet, no matter how much it is repeated, Sarramián’s speech and that of other farmers never ceases to surprise: “they wanted to pay me half as much as the previous year. I preferred to throw it away. If we all go through the hoop, we are going against ourselves,” he says.
We have heard it many times, yes; but does it make sense?
Are they right in their complaint? That is the first thing to clarify and the truth is that if we look at the data, it is difficult to say no. The origin-destination commercial margin of tomato reached in 2025 81.1% (second highest in a decade)according to data from the Observatory of the Junta de Andalucía.
In fact, without leaving aside the case of the tomato, a 2020 study by the Institut Cerdà on the value chain pointed out that the total cost of tomatoes is €0.61/kg (labor 0.258; seeds 0.081; structure 0.078; fertilizers 0.059; others) compared to the €0.57/kg paid to the producer. And this is data from 2017: the situation has only worsened since the war in Ukraine.
It doesn’t seem like the best business in the world. In fact, it seems like a pretty bad one. Above all, because although we have been developing regulations for years that allow us to limit the impact of these problems, they all end up in a dead letter.
Furthermore, the external pressure (especially from Morocco for the tomato issue) is enormous. And many of the main market players play “double agents” because they are conglomerates with investments on both sides of the Strait.
Why should we care? I imagine that the simplest data to understand how this impacts the consumer is this: we are paying for fresh tomatoes. the highest price in the last decade and, at the same time, the farmer who grows it in Spain affirms that it does not pay him to harvest it. And, anyway, as we have just seen, he is right.
And, under these circumstances, why would they want to throw away the harvest? That is to say, it is worth paying below cost; But something will always be better than nothing, right? And that idea makes sense, but it ignores some important things.
To begin with, that between 25 and 30% of agricultural costs They occur in collection, packaging, transportation and wholesale sales (with possible associated losses). If they are not collected, the farmer loses what he has already invested, yes. But it does not incur more costs that it cannot recover.
Furthermore, as we have seen in situations like lemon either the bananaletting part of the harvest be lost prevents prices from collapsing. It is not an easy strategy to implement (because there are always people with incentives to sell as the price rises), but it is a rational strategy.
Tick tock Tick tock All this happens in a very specific context: in June it begins the negotiation of the post-2027 CAP and that is what makes the key question not “why does Clara Sarramián throw away her tomatoes?” but “how do we ensure that one of the central industries of the Spanish economy (the only one that supports the emptied Spain) does not die in a matter of a few years?”
Image | Rachel Clark
In Xataka | We have a problem with pesticides in agriculture. And a bigger one with the panic they generate
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings