'Turning to green takes at least one generation'

The European Green Deal makes no bones about it: agriculture must go green. This means, among other things, a significant reduction in the use of chemicals. But what is the alternative if the authorization of green products is painfully slow? The call for different laws and regulations seems greater than ever.

Should the European Plant Protection Products Regulation be broken open? This was the subject of a large part of the discussion during Foodlog's annual conference entitled 'Agriculture without chemistry; how?'. A valid question if we zoom in on the authorization procedure for substances. Whether they are chemical or green, the principles for assessment are the same. Dan means that they will not receive approval unless safe use has been demonstrated. Practice shows that this is easier to demonstrate unambiguously for chemical agents than for green agents, which are often used systemically.

Too few green resources
According to Piet Boonekamp, ​​director of Artemis, this leads to a direct problem: there are too few biological resources available in Europe. “In the Netherlands, less than 2% of the products used in outdoor cultivation is of organic origin. Admission to the EU takes at least 5 years, unlike Brazil (1 year) and the United States (2 years). At our current pace, it will never be possible to meet the minister's recycling plans for 2030. Faster legislation is needed.”

This answers the question of Dick Veerman, director of Foodlog, in his opening words. “Good agriculture is about prevention rather than intervention. That requires a different way of thinking. We are now in that transition, but is it going fast enough?” There will be no discussion about that answer during the congress. All the more about the possible solution – amending the European Plant Protection Products Regulation. 

“I can sense in this discussion that the precautionary principle (only undisputed substances may be allowed, ed.) is being severely curtailed,” says Anne de Vries, who from Tilburg University conducts research into plant protection products law, among other things. “I have major reservations about that. There is a risk that substances will come onto the market that subsequently prove to be unsafe. That can also be micro-organisms.”

Other assessment framework
However, the difficult and slow admission of green resources remains a problem. Jurgen Köhl, researcher at Wageningen UR: “Current practice is that non-relevant risks are taken into account in the assessment of biological agents. Different expertise is needed to determine the safety of a biological agent.” Nicolette Klijnhout-Klijn of Skal Biocontrole agrees: “We have to move towards a different assessment framework.”

Something that MEP Bas Eickhout agrees with. “But,” he adds, “like it or not, it takes a lot of time. In the meantime, it is good to see what options there are without breaking open the regulation.” According to De Vries, those options are there. “Amending the law is complex. The implementation of parts can be adjusted much faster via the committees. The assessment by the right experts is an example of this. So look very carefully at what is currently working and what is not.”

Experiment room
Building on this, Piet Boonekamp (Artemis) and Aleid Dik (NAV) argued for more room for experimentation. Now you are not allowed to do anything with the substance in question during the period that the authorization application is running (5 years). Room for experimentation offers the opportunity to gather much more knowledge in the meantime about how the product behaves in cultivation.

Dik: “In this way we get to know a product well before it is widely marketed. This allows us to use it optimally and avoid disappointments. That is cost efficient and sustainable. An arable farmer puts some power into the ground and wants to get it out again.”

"How much time do we get?"
It will be crystal clear at the end of the congress that the current legislation and regulations (in part) require adjustment. What is also clear is that everyone wants to move towards sustainable agriculture. However, that also takes time, states Member of Parliament Roelof Bisschop (SGP). “For 60 years we have strived for a profitable agriculture that produces sufficient food at low costs. Certain choices in this regard turn out to be disastrous for nature and the environment, among other things. This has to change, but we have to realize that a change takes at least 1 generation.”

Or to conclude with the question of a common arable farmer from the audience: “Are we doing so badly, when is it good enough and how much time do we have to take the next step in sustainability?”

Jeanette Pennings

Jeannet has her roots in the flower bulb sector and she grew up on an agricultural company in the northern part of North Holland. As a generalist she reports for Boerenbusiness across all sectors. She is also exploring the possibilities of sponsored advertising.

j.pennings@boerenbusiness. Nl

© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.