Impact of pesticides in Europe

Impact of pesticides in Europe

In September 2023, the European Commission proposed to renew the authorization of glyphosate in the EU for ten years under certain conditions; as expected, a scientific, political and social debate of considerable importance has opened.
The renewal proposal came following a report from the EU Authority where it was estimated (it is not known on what scientific basis) that the level of risk does not justify the ban on this controversial herbicide.
The current authorization of glyphosate, renewed in 2017 for five years, expired on December 15, 2022, but was extended for one year pending a scientific evaluation. In July, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) indicated that it had not identified any “critical areas of concern” for effects on humans, animals and the environment that would prevent the authorization of the herbicide.
This determination leaves us, to say the least, dismayed when in fact the negative effects of this herbicide and other pesticides on the ecosystem and therefore also on humans (which are a part of it) are known (following many scientific publications) .
Unfortunately, food production systems in Europe, the result of industrial agriculture, which is no longer viable and highly inefficient from both an energy and production point of view, rely on chemical pesticides to ensure harvests.
On the other hand, despite the recommendations, innovations and strategies of the European Union (such as Farm to Fork and Biodiversity 2030), from 2011 to 2020, sales of pesticides in the EU-27 remained relatively stable at approximately 350,000 tons per year. Although it is widely demonstrated by scientific publications and field experiences that agroecology is the only viable frontier, nothing has changed.
As is known, the widespread use of pesticides is one of the main sources of pollution: they contaminate water, soil and air, cause the loss of biodiversity and lead to parasite resistance. Furthermore, subsoil biodiversity, which is often the most underestimated, has reached levels of absolute concern with an unprecedented loss of microorganisms and their fertility; causes which then generate production losses, abandonment of the countryside, destruction of the soil, landslides, landslides and, often and unfortunately, disasters and deaths.
Furthermore, as many peer-reviewed research reports, human exposure to chemical pesticides is linked to diseases such as cancer and cardiac, respiratory and neurological diseases.
To these data was added a publication from the European Environment Agency (EEA) which summarizes the latest knowledge on the impact of chemical pesticides on human health and the environment and presents good practices to reduce their use and the risk throughout Europe.
Among other things, from the 2020 findings, based on national data reported to the EEA, one or more pesticides were detected above the effect or quality thresholds in 22% of surface water monitoring sites reported in Europe, including rivers and lakes.
Between 2013 and 2020, the lowest pass rate was 10% and the highest was 25%.
Between 2013 and 2020, exceedances were also detected at 4-11% of groundwater monitoring sites.
In detail, again in 2020, the insecticide imidacloprid and the herbicide metolachlor showed the highest absolute number of exceedances across Europe.
In groundwater, the highly persistent herbicide atrazine and its metabolites have caused the greatest number of exceedances, even though atrazine has been banned since 2007 (remember that atrazine – as scientists explain – is an endocrine disruptor, i.e. alters the functionality of the endocrine system, causing many negative effects on the health of humans and animals and their offspring, even at low concentrations).
Among other things, most of the substances with a high number of exceedances across Europe are no longer approved in the EU. This indicates the long-term impacts of pesticide use and possible emergency uses.
At the same time, European-wide monitoring data on recently approved pesticides, as well as data on coformulants and adjuvants, are generally not available. In short, a situation that is largely out of control and difficult to evaluate.
Most worryingly, as far as terrestrial ecosystems are concerned, there are currently no EU quality standards for pesticides in soil. The planned European Soil Health Law, announced in the EU Soil Strategy 2030, could fill this gap by specifying the conditions for “healthy” soil and determining options for soil monitoring at EU level ( Pieper et al., 2023).
At the same time, the Joint Research Centre’s (JRC) Land Use and Coverage Area frame (LUCAS) database includes data on pesticide residues in EU agricultural soils (Orgiazzi et al., 2022).
The study by Silva et al., 2019, based on data from the 2015 LUCAS survey, found that 83% of soil samples contained one or more pesticide residues, while 58% contained mixtures of two or more pesticides.
The most common mixture detected was the herbicide glyphosate and its metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), accounting for 25% of all pesticide combinations in soil.
Furthermore, to support these data, in the study by Geissen et al., 2021, conducted in three EU countries, it was found that the soils of organic farms contain significantly fewer residues than those of organic farms. conventional.
However, recent assessments show that pesticide exposure is linked to a wide range of direct (both lethal and non-lethal) and indirect effects on biodiversity, contributing to declines in populations of insects, birds, bats, earthworms, aquatic plants, fish and amphibians (Mamy et al., 2022). Insects and other invertebrates are most directly affected by pesticides.
Furthermore, the decrease in pollinators is having, in addition to the serious ecological impact on these organisms, significant economic damage on production.
Pollinator-dependent crops are a major food source of many key nutrients such as dietary lipids, vitamins A, C, and E, and some minerals (Eiler et al., 2011). Future crop losses linked to pollinator decline could reduce intake of some food groups such as fruits, vegetables and nuts. This could lead to an increase in non-communicable diseases such as stroke, cardiovascular disease and cancer (Smith et al., 2022).
Now, beyond the professional illnesses of farmers or workers who use pesticides and the consequences on human health of the use of foods containing pesticides, interference on ecosystems is the real concern for the very future of the planet and therefore of the the whole of humanity.
Let us remember that biodiversity represents a complex thermodynamic system that dissipates solar energy (Prigogine I., Nicolis G., 1982) to convert it into stored energy (biomass and other services) while at the same time cooling the planet.
The decrease in biodiversity (with its CO2/O2 ratio) triggers a dangerous loss of thermodynamic efficiency of ecosystems with consequent reduction of their functions, including those of a food nature.
For this reason, achieving the objectives set in the Farm to Fork Strategy “Farm to Fork” will therefore require further efforts from EU policy makers and member states. These efforts should not only aim to reduce current use of pesticides and associated risks: they should also prevent new risks at the risk assessment and marketing authorization stage.
To mitigate the impact on human health and ecosystems, it is important to limit or ban the use of pesticides in public spaces, in areas used for drinking water extraction and, where possible, in ecologically sensitive areas. Such use restrictions, included in the proposed regulation on the sustainable use of plant protection products and in some of the common agricultural policy (CAP) strategic plans adopted by member states, also require buffer zones of adequate size around sensitive areas where it is spraying is prohibited (Aguiar et al., 2015).
Banning or limiting the use of pesticides in public spaces is an increasingly popular measure at national and subnational levels, as demonstrated by the “Pesticide Free Towns” initiative (Pesticide Action Network Europe, 2022).
In this regard it should be underlined that the L.R. 21 of 29 July 2021 of the Sicilian Region, with the art. 3, had foreseen this type of action, which was unfortunately challenged first by the Ministry of Health, which did not carry out any scientific verification on the objectives and implications of the article, and subsequently by the Council of State.
All this shows us, in case there were any doubts, a less than “lucid” vision of the political community at both a national and European level, despite the appeals of scientists and researchers who try in every way to counter the greenwashing adopted by the excessive power of large economic interests of the chemical lobbies.
Yet data from the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) are unequivocal: approximately 25% of population groups made up of terrestrial, freshwater and marine vertebrates, invertebrates and plants are at risk of extinction.
Despite this, both in Brussels and in other areas, there is still discussion about whether, for example, we need to renew the use of glyphosate and whether this herbicide (to name the most infamous) is harmful to ecosystems and human health.

Guido Bissanti