Following on from the European Commission's announcement at the beginning of the week that it will push ahead with a partial ban on neonicotinoid pesticides in the EU this year, the debate over the controversial insecticides and bee health – the most widely used pesticide variety worldwide – has only increased in scope and intensity.

image expired

The three named pesticides (clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiametoxam) will be subject to a moratorium from December this year, covering use on crops attractive to bees, certain applications and application at specific times of year.

Talks and voting in Brussels on Monday did not lead to a clear agreement between member states on the issue. However, the continued deadlock allowed the European Commission to push ahead with its proposed ban, as advised by the European Food Safety Authority, which reviewed data on the pesticides last year and concluded in January that they pose a risk to bees.

Throughout the Northern Hemisphere bee populations are in decline, and evidence suggests that wild pollinating insects including hoverflies, moths, wasps and butterflies are also in trouble. Although the declines are thought to be the result of a combination of factors, including habitat loss, disease and the effects of climate change, mounting evidence suggests that widespread use of certain pesticides may be a contributing factor.

Scrutiny of the pesticides has spread since EFSA published its scientific opinion at the start of the year; on Thursday, the US Department of Agriculture released its Report on Honey Bee Health, compiled from meetings with over 125 stakeholders. The report primarily deals with Colony Collapse Disorder, which has been reported in the United States, and, less frequently, in areas of Europe since 2006. CCD occurs when worker bees from a colony abruptly disappear, though its cause remains a mystery.

USDA report points to complex combination of stresses on bees

USDA sad that an overview of research and dealings with stakeholders led to the conclusion that, the parasitic Varroa mite presents the single most severe threat to honey bee health, adding that the mite is "closely associated with overwintering colony declines". The report also points out that "Multiple virus species have been associated with CCD [and] Varroa is known to cause amplified levels of viruses."

image expired

However, the department also noted that, "Acute and sublethal effects of pesticides on honey bees have been increasingly documented, and are a primary concern," though it advised that "Further research is required to establish the risks associated with pesticide exposure to US honey bee[s]."

USDA went on to warn that poor nutrition and a lack of genetic diversity may be hampering honey bees' ability to combat diseases and other pressures they face. The report's authors said monoculture agriculture may be affecting bees' nutrition by limiting the variety of their diet, whereas the insects would have benefitted from nutrients from a wider variety of plants in past decades.

At an industry conference on Bee Health held in Oxford on Tuesday, Professor Robert Paxton of Halle Wittenberg University and Queen's University Belfast added weight to this presumption. He said "One thing is certain, the intensification of agriculture since the 1960s has coincided with a drop-off in wild bee populations."

The USDA and Environmental Protection Agency said that, in light of the evidence presented, they will develop a CCD Action Plan, to inform policy over the next five to ten years. In the UK, the government has been repeatedly urged by conservationist groups to draw up a Bee Plan, covering aspects of policy including planning, research and environmental protection, but has so far failed to respond. 

Experts back Commission moves, though UK remains resolute

Although the EU is set to introduce tight restrictions on the use of neonicotinoids in the wake of Monday's Council of Ministers vote, opinion within the bloc is divided. The ban was backed by a majority of 15 member states this week, with eight (including Britain) voting against, and four states standing aside.

The UK delegation under Defra secretary Owen Paterson has said he is not prepared to act until more research has been conducted into the effects of pesticides on bee health; he claims that current research does not prove beyond doubt that neonicotinoids have any negative effect under field conditions; a field study by government agency FERA released earlier this year revealed no evidence of health impacts on bee colonies, though the experiment was summarily criticised, as all colonies (including the control) were exposed to neonicotinoids, including one variety that was not being studied.

Opponents of Defra's position have said that the government's obstinate stance goes against a persuasive body of evidence, and directly contradicts the precautionary principle, which the UK and EU are obliged to uphold. The principle states that "Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation."

The UK's longest serving environment minister Lord Deben has said on the subject "If ever there were an issue where the precautionary principle should guide our actions, it is the use of neonicotinoid pesticides. Bees are too important to lose."

In response to the findings outlined in the USDA report, Jennifer Sass of the US-based Natural resources Defense Council accused government officials of protecting business interests over vital insect pollinators. She urged US regulators to suspend use of neonicotinoids along the lines of the EU restrictions, while research institutes and industry conduct rigorous testing, adding that research "should be publicly-available for peer review and public scrutiny."

The European Environment Agency, the environmental protection organ of the EU, also expressed support for the Commission's decision this week. Pointing to the EFSA's assessment of neonicotinoids as presenting "high acute risks" to pollinator health, EEA commended the Commission for abiding by the precautionary principle.

In the recent EEA report 'Late Lessons from Early Warnings, volume II', published in January this year, the EEA considered the body of evidence surrounding neonicotinoid imidacloprid from scientific studies, beekeepers and industry. The Agency concluded that the chemical should be withdrawn from the market given the evidence of harm and scale of the risk. EEA suggested that "mounting scientific evidence has been systematically suppressed for many years and early warning were ignored. Where such evidence exists, uncertainty should not be an excuse for inaction, the report states."

On Thursday, EEA Executive Director Jacqueline McGlade commented on the situation in Europe. She said, "Based on the body of evidence, we can see that it is absolutely correct to take a precautionary approach and ban these chemicals. France has banned some of these chemicals on sunflower and maize since 2004, and it seems productivity has not been affected – 2007 was France's best year for yield of these crops for over a decade.

"Also, any economic analysis should consider the almost immeasurable value of pollination carried out by honeybees and other wild bees. Indeed, continuing to use these chemicals would risk a vital service that underpins European agriculture."