December 7, 2009
Source: AlphaGalileo Foundation
‘Most consumers and environmentalists would like to see less use of chemical pesticides in the production of our food. But the greater use of ‘greener' insecticides is being partly hampered in the UK and other European countries by regulatory barriers.' concludes Professor Wyn Grant based on his research at Warwick University
Farmers and growers face the challenge of using more environmentally acceptable methods of crop protection while maintaining food quality, productivity and profitability. The response to this, according to Professor Grant, is that the debate has polarised between the use of conventional farming including chemical pesticides, and organic farming. ‘Now I see a viable ‘middle way'- a chance to reduce chemical inputs using an Integrated Pest Management system based on biological control agents such as naturally occurring fungi, bacteria or viruses. Such pesticides offer several advantages such as low impact on non-target organisms, compatibility with other natural insect enemies and limited toxic residue. A primary concern for chemical treatments for example has been potential toxic residues entering watercourses or ground water.'
The research at Warwick found that, despite the advantages offered by microbiological biopesticides, their uptake had been very poor in the UK. ‘A key problem is that insufficient products are on the market, partly due to a regulatory system developed to suit chemical pesticides which does not facilitate the registration of biopesticides.' argues Professor Grant. ‘I estimate that the bio industry is currently only around 1 per cent the size of synthetics.' This contrasts with the US where a large internal market, support from government and a clear mission by the US Environmental Protection Agency is smoothing the path for biopesticides.
Solutions to the problem include a European -wide shake up of regulation, thinks Professor Grant. ‘In the UK, a scheme introduced by the Chemical Regulations Directorate in 2006 is working on improving regulation, but shortcomings in the EU system of recognition are proving a significant barrier to growth of a European-wide market for biopesticides. With no effective internal market like in the US it is hard for medium sized enterprises which typically develop and produce biopesticides to secure economies of scale.'
There are several possible ways forward he says: ‘One is the adoption of eco-zones throughout Europe whereby a product approved in, say, the UK could automatically be eligible for use in other countries. The EU has now formally adopted this idea but it looks as if it will be some time before it is fully implemented. Another possibility is that the EU approves a separate registration route for biopesticides which is not based on the chemical pesticides model - a ‘middle way'.
Pressure for ‘real' change could however arise from the power of consumers and those who sell food. ‘Supermarkets could play a key role', suggests Professor Grant.
‘Some major supermarket chains claim they are under pressure from consumers to minimise pesticide residues and some have even prohibited or controlled use of approved chemical pesticides as part of a ‘green' marketing strategy. If retailers were to get behind biopesticides this would provide real impetus to more being produced. The production capacity to meet current demand is already in place and it can be scaled up to cope with major expansion.'
Topics
Species
