PROPOSED European legislation to tighten pesticide regulations and the definition of endocrine disruptors (ED) has the potential to cost UK agriculture more than £905 million, according to a report commissioned by AHDB, which assessed the estimated financial impact of the loss of crop protection active substances which might be defined as EDs under the new EU hazard-based approach.
AHDB chairman Peter Kendall said: “The ability of UK farmers and growers to seize their share of growing market opportunities depends on having the right tools to become the most efficient and sustainable food producers they can.
“Central to that ambition is retaining access to effective crop protection products.
“This AHDB report comes at a critical time to provide independent information to inform the wider debate.”
A recent report by consultants Andersons on behalf of the Crop Protection Association (CPA), NFU and Agricultural Industries Confederation, looked at the impact of the loss or restriction of crop protection products through European regulation over the next five to seven years.
The analysis showed 40 substances at high risk of being lost would mean yield decreases of up to 50 per cent depending on the crop, with UK total income from farming dropping by £1.73 billion, a 36 per cent fall in overall profits.
The report found 17 substances, almost half of those at high risk of being lost or restricted, were as a result of the ED criteria.
CPA chief executive, Nick von Westenholz, said: “Depending on how the EU chooses to define an ED, we could see a dramatic fall in the number of crop protection products available to farmers.”
NFU vice-president Guy Smith said the AHDB report illustrated the “potentially calamitous” impact of one of the most significant EU regulatory decisions, which threatened the accessibility of UK and EU farmers to plant protection products (PPP).
“It is critical the review of the endocrine disruptor definition is based on the best scientific understanding of the risk,” he said.
Currently, an active ingredient cannot be used in a PPP if it is classed as an ED, regardless of potency of effect and evidence of harm.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article