A report published by a European farming think tank and funded by agribusinesses Syngenta and Bayer CropScience has claimed a controversial pesticide family is worth £630 million to British agriculture each year.

image expired

The Value of Neonicotinoid Seed Treatment, which was published on Monday (14th January) by the Humboldt Forum for Food and Agriculture (HFFA) finds that neonicotinoid insecticides make a significant contribution to crop production in the UK. The pesticides have been the subject of intense debate in the UK, and face bans and restrictions in parts of mainland Europe, after 30 peer-reviewed studies linked their use to impacts on pollinator health in the space of three years.

The new report is based on analysis of 10 EU countries (Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Italy, Spain, France, the UK and the Netherlands) and six focus crops (corn, sugar beet, oilseed rape, wheat, barley and sunflower). Study financiers bayer and Syngenta are the two main producers of neonicotinoid seed treatments for the UK industry.

The HFFA study suggests "Seed treatment is one of the most advanced and targeted forms of Crop Protection [that] enables farmers to improve their productivity and profitability, manage risks and adversities, reduce workload as well as operational complexity, and innovate and professionalize their businesses."

In light of evidence of the chemicals' impacts on pollinator health, NGOs including Friends of the Earth and the Soil Association as well as scientific researchers working for the EU-commissioned STEP project have called for bans and restrictions of the pesticides.

The industry report suggests that the pesticides "contribute more than £2 billion annually to commodity crop revenues." It also warns that "In the UK [in unfavourable years] loss of neonicotinoid could lead to yield decline of up to 20 percent for winter wheat farmers" and states that the loss of neonicotinoid seed treatments would cost the UK economy £630million each year, adding that this could also add to indirect land use change elsewhere in the world to support the EU's food needs and lead to several thousand job losses across the EU.

The study makes no mention of pollinators or bee health.

Report author Steffen Noleppa, from agripol said, "This report shows that the loss of neonicotinoid seed treatment would seriously damage sustainable food production in Europe.  Our report found that the consequence of such a ban for wider society could include lower crop yields, leading to higher commodity prices."

Cost of pollinator loss dwarfs that of neonicotinoid bans

In May 2012, researchers from Reading University contributing to the STEP project released a study showing that the economic value placed on insect pollinator activity had been drastically underestimated. The researchers revealed that the loss of wild insect pollinators would cost the UK £1.8 billion each year, a figure 20 per cent higher than previously estimated.

Nevertheless, NFU bee health advisor Dr Chris Hartfield welcomed the study. He said on Tuesday, "The results of this [HFFA] work are important, particularly in light of work being done currently by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) reviewing neonicotinoid seed treatments. While EFSA's work has identified gaps in the current regulatory process assessing how pesticides affect bees, we still do not know how relevant these gaps are and whether plugging them would actually improve the health of bees or other pollinators. Any decision to change the way pesticides are used to control crop pests will have an impact on both the protection of insect pollinators and the protection of crops."

Nick Mole, policy officer at the Pesticide Action Network, questioned the Hatfield's observations. He told Farming Online, "The fact is, We need a suspension while we look at what is going on with neonicotinoids. Until it can be proven that they aren't having a detrimental impact on pollinators, their use should be banned," and added, "What we don't need are delaying tactics and calls for more research."  

Mr Mole also said some of HFFA's figures appear to have been reached by comparing use of neonicotinoids with using no pest control whatsoever, and that this does not take into account other effective approaches such as integrated pest management. Describing the report's findings as "alarmist," he explained that its conclusions fly in the face of evidence from Italy, where neonicotinoids have been banned and both yields and economic returns from arable farming have been maintained.

Soil Association Policy Director Peter Melchett also quesitoned the report's value. He said that, on balance, economic evidence still supports a ban on the pesticides. Melchett commented "As this report was funded by Bayer Crop Sciences and Syngenta, it was probably unlikely to conclude that neonicotinoids should be banned. On the one hand, the chemical companies say we risk the additional costs to farmers amounting to £630 million. On the other, the possible cost of losing pollinating insects is thought to be worth three times as much to UK farmers."

The Soil Association-backed Keep Britain Buzzing campaign is calling for neonicotinoids to be banned in the UK and has been campaigning along with other NGOs to highlight issues around use of the controversial pesticide.

Inquest launched over Defra fence-sitting

Defra has so far refused to act on evidence that neonicotinoids may be harming the UK's insect pollinators. Defra secretary Owen Paterson commissioned FERA to look into the effects of pesticides on pollinators last year. Defra maintains that, as much of the evidence against neonicotinoids is based on laboratory studies, it is not conclusive proof of harm in the field.

In November, the Environmental Audit Committee, which assesses government policy on its sustainability, launched an inquest into the department's inaction. Giving information to the inquest, industry representatives told the committee that tighter restrictions on neonicotinoids may lead to more pressure on farmers to use GM crops or older, more damaging pesticides.

However, campaigners from the Pesticide Action Network contested this, explaining once again that bans in Italy and France have resulted in nothing of the sort, with no demonstrable adverse effects for farmers. PAN suggested encouraging natural predators, as well as rolling out other agroecological measures, would provide real benefits for farmers, the environment and wider society.

The EFSA is expected to release its analysis of the impacts of neonicotinoid seed treatments later in the week.