Emergency authorisations of plant protection products should not become the norm, with their frequent use being a symptom of systemic policy issues, said MEP Alexander Bernhuber (EPP).

Speaking at CropLife Europe’s fifth anniversary conference in Brussels, the Austrian MEP said the EU risks leaving farmers without workable solutions in the field if it allows plant protection products to disappear before alternatives are available.

“We lose substances all the time, and this happens mainly from the reauthorisation and withdrawal of substances. That means that if you do not facilitate conventional products alongside biocontrols, we might end up not having enough substances for our farmers,” Copa-Cogeca policy advisor Tamás Racskó said.

Missed deadlines threaten EU firms

Bernhuber said the EU needs a fast-track authorisation process for biocontrols to help bring new products on the market to ensure farmers still have solutions they can rely on in their fields.

Patrick Kabouw, head of regulatory at Belgian startup Aphea.Bio, flagged that in the case of their own microbial solution for plant protection, the legal deadline for a decision was exceeded by 840%.

“For us, that’s not a bureaucratic hurdle, that’s an essential threat to our survival as we’re running out of money,” Kabouw said.

Domenico Deserio, a policy officer at the European Commission’s public health directorate (DG Sante), said one of the main challenges for regulators is striking “the right balance between predictability and flexibility”. Businesses need consistency along the regulatory path, he said, but explained that regulators also need a framework that is future-proof and open enough to deal with technologies that were not foreseen a few years ago.

Deserio added that renewal programmes are “really hampering the access to market of substances in general”, adding that removing them could allow authorities to reallocate their efforts elsewhere.

‘Apply the deadlines’

Addressing worries that the Commission’s proposal on mutual recognition of plant protection products could lead member states to reject applications automatically if no decision is taken within 120 days, Deserio said this was one of the “hot topics” in the ongoing negotiations.

“There’s no intention of the proposal making all the mutual recognitions be rejected within 120 days. So that’s really under discussion now,” Deserio said, noting that the intention is to apply the deadlines already foreseen by the regulation [Regulation (EU) 1107/2009].

Concerns about authorisations were also raised in the conference’s GMO debate, where speakers said Europe’s approval system needs to better reflect decades of scientific experience.

Corteva Agriscience’s EMEA head of government and industry affairs, Teresa Babuscio, pointed to older requirements that are still routinely carried out, including 90-day feeding studies and 28-day protein studies, even though, she argued, international bodies have suggested such tests may no longer always be needed to establish safety.

Echoing comments from other panellists, Babuscio said that on paper, Europe probably has “the most beautiful legislation in the world”, but statutory timelines are not being respected.

“If we stick to what is written black and white on the regulations, we would have a much more functioning system,” Babuscio said.

Simplifying with EU digital labelling rules

Innovation was a key trend across the conference, which also featured live demonstrations of AgriGuide, a digital labelling platform created by CropLife Europe. AgriGuide aims to provide farmers with easy access to digital plant protection product labels, electronic record-keeping and reduced complexity in agricultural practices to keep up with evolving regulations.

Max Schulman, a Finnish farmer and chair of the plant protection working party at Cope-Cogeca said labels attached to pesticide packages have become increasingly long and complex. As the January 2030 deadline for all plant protection products to contain a digital label approaches, Schulman said digital tools like AgriGuide allow farmers to access crucial information about these products through smartphones or tablets.

While several speakers representing farmers said they embrace innovation and new tools, Alina Cretu, executive director of the Romanian Professional Farmers and Processors Forum (APPR), said new technologies raise questions over data ownership. Farmers are often handing over data for free, she said, while third parties may be building business models around it.

‘Crystal clear rules’

Peter Hloben, who chairs a project team at the European Agricultural Machinery Industry (CEMA), highlighted how the Common European Agricultural Data Space (CEADS) project, which was launched as part of the European Strategy for Data, should eliminate such fears within the next five years. He said this space will create a legal environment with “crystal clear rules” about data governance.

While speakers representing farmers broadly welcomed the direction of related policies and the Commission’s Vision for Agriculture and Food, Racskó said growers are ultimately less concerned with the institutional mechanics than with whether workable solutions reach them in time.

Smaller farms in particular often lack the time, knowledge and capacity to follow EU negotiations closely, he said. Bernhuber voiced similar thoughts, saying the EU should focus above all on making life easier for farmers.

“We have to ask ourselves: What do they need and how can we deliver for them? They don’t care about all the details and the authorisation processes. They have a problem, and they need a solution,” Bernhuber said, “and I think at some points we are much too slow.”

[BM]