Sustainable use of plant protection products Ján
Description: Sustainable use of plant protection products Ján Baršváry, Slovak Agriculture and Food Chamber National Convention on the EU Vlorë, Albania, 22.11.2022 Societal interests Current situation in sustainable use of PPPs Directive 2009128ES on
Related Topics
Download Presentation
"Sustainable use of plant protection products Ján" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this website for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Presentation Transcript
slide1. Sustainable use of plant protection products Ján Baršváry, Slovak Agriculture and Food Chamber National Convention on the EU
Vlorë, Albania, 22.11.2022<br>
slide2. Societal interests<br>
slide3. Current situation in sustainable use of PPPs Directive 2009/128/ES on sustainable use of pesticides
EU MS were required to adopt National Action Plans to implement the Directive
The Directive identifies specific measures that EU MS are required to include in their plans:
training of users, advisors and distributors
inspection of pesticide application equipment
the prohibition of aerial spraying
the protection of the aquatic environment and drinking water (buffer zones)
limitation of pesticide use in sensitive areas
information and awareness raising about pesticide risks
systems for gathering information on pesticide acute poisoning incidents, as well as chronic poisoning developments<br>
slide4. EGD (F2F) – SUR Several targets in various areas until 2030
Targets related to PPPs:
Reduce the use of chemical pesticides and related risk by 50%
Reduce the use of more dangerous pesticides by 50%
25% of total agricultural land under organic farming
These targets are reflected in the draft Regulation on sustainable use of plant protection products
Presented on 22 June 2022
Inapropriate timing Other strategies
Biodiversity strategy
Action plan for zero emissions
Soil strategy
Initiative for pollinators
Sustainability strategy for chemicals
Health protection and labour safety strategy<br>
slide5. SUR main objectives The first main objective:
Reduce the use of chemical pesticides and the resulting risk, especially when it comes to pesticides containing more dangerous active substances
Increase the rate of application and enforcement of IPM
Increase the rate of use of less dangerous and non-chemical alternatives to chemical pesticides in pest control<br>
slide6. SUR main objectives The second main objective is to improve the availability of monitoring data, including data on:
The application and use of pesticides and the resulting risk, and
Health and environmental monitoring
The third main objective:
Encourage the use of new technologies, such as precision agriculture, which uses satellite data and services (including geospatial localization techniques), in an effort to reduce overall pesticide use and the resulting risk.<br>
slide7. SPPK main comments We disagree with PPP reduction targets by 35%, 50% or 65 %
We require to analyze the range of proposed sensitive areas in which the use of any plant protection preparations shall be prohibited
We ask to reduce the disproportionately high administrative burden on state authorities and thus also on professional users
We propose to delete the provision regarding the 25% target area under the organic farming regime
As a general comment we asked to delay PPP reduction by several years<br>
slide8. COPA COGECA position The Commission's proposals have no scientific basis
Asks for full impact assessment on the EU food security
Speed-up approval processes for new active substances (alternatives)
Speed-up development of new genomic techniques
No other restrictions in protected areas
Without effective alternatives, a 50% reduction in usage is irresponsible
The same rules are also necessary for imported goods<br>
slide9. The Council position 10 delegations led by the Polish one strongly asked for an effective revision of the Commission’s proposal, considered ‘outdated’ and out of context, as
it doesn’t reflect the impacts of the war in Ukraine, and
the fact that the impact assessment did not consider any consequences on food security5
Firstly rejected, now supported by 15 MS
Increased possibility SUR to be blocked by MS ministers<br>
slide10. The European Parliament position Discussions in ComAgri and ComEnvi
Both of the will create their own positions in the 1st half of 2023
Possibility of SUR to be blocked by the EP<br>
slide11. Shall CAP compensate smooth transition to more sustainable use of pesticides? The Commission explicitly says that the additional regulatory costs could be compensated by the CAP budget
BUT:
the CAP budget is already allocated and most of the SP SPP approved
the CAP budget is quickly shrinking - high inflation reduces the real value of support<br>
slide12. Conclusion Even more sustainable use of PPPs - YES
BUT farmers depends on their income, therefore:
Impact assessment on EU food securitry to be done, including impact on economic situation of farmers and inhabitants
Farmers have to have tools to implement reduction (new machinery, new breeds, alternative substances)
It should be supported outside CAP (or to increase CAP budget)
Sensitive areas have to be identified on scientific basis<br>
slide13. Thank you for your attention! Ján Baršváry Slovak Chamber of Agriculture and Food barsvary@sppk.sk<br>
Vlorë, Albania, 22.11.2022<br>
slide2. Societal interests<br>
slide3. Current situation in sustainable use of PPPs Directive 2009/128/ES on sustainable use of pesticides
EU MS were required to adopt National Action Plans to implement the Directive
The Directive identifies specific measures that EU MS are required to include in their plans:
training of users, advisors and distributors
inspection of pesticide application equipment
the prohibition of aerial spraying
the protection of the aquatic environment and drinking water (buffer zones)
limitation of pesticide use in sensitive areas
information and awareness raising about pesticide risks
systems for gathering information on pesticide acute poisoning incidents, as well as chronic poisoning developments<br>
slide4. EGD (F2F) – SUR Several targets in various areas until 2030
Targets related to PPPs:
Reduce the use of chemical pesticides and related risk by 50%
Reduce the use of more dangerous pesticides by 50%
25% of total agricultural land under organic farming
These targets are reflected in the draft Regulation on sustainable use of plant protection products
Presented on 22 June 2022
Inapropriate timing Other strategies
Biodiversity strategy
Action plan for zero emissions
Soil strategy
Initiative for pollinators
Sustainability strategy for chemicals
Health protection and labour safety strategy<br>
slide5. SUR main objectives The first main objective:
Reduce the use of chemical pesticides and the resulting risk, especially when it comes to pesticides containing more dangerous active substances
Increase the rate of application and enforcement of IPM
Increase the rate of use of less dangerous and non-chemical alternatives to chemical pesticides in pest control<br>
slide6. SUR main objectives The second main objective is to improve the availability of monitoring data, including data on:
The application and use of pesticides and the resulting risk, and
Health and environmental monitoring
The third main objective:
Encourage the use of new technologies, such as precision agriculture, which uses satellite data and services (including geospatial localization techniques), in an effort to reduce overall pesticide use and the resulting risk.<br>
slide7. SPPK main comments We disagree with PPP reduction targets by 35%, 50% or 65 %
We require to analyze the range of proposed sensitive areas in which the use of any plant protection preparations shall be prohibited
We ask to reduce the disproportionately high administrative burden on state authorities and thus also on professional users
We propose to delete the provision regarding the 25% target area under the organic farming regime
As a general comment we asked to delay PPP reduction by several years<br>
slide8. COPA COGECA position The Commission's proposals have no scientific basis
Asks for full impact assessment on the EU food security
Speed-up approval processes for new active substances (alternatives)
Speed-up development of new genomic techniques
No other restrictions in protected areas
Without effective alternatives, a 50% reduction in usage is irresponsible
The same rules are also necessary for imported goods<br>
slide9. The Council position 10 delegations led by the Polish one strongly asked for an effective revision of the Commission’s proposal, considered ‘outdated’ and out of context, as
it doesn’t reflect the impacts of the war in Ukraine, and
the fact that the impact assessment did not consider any consequences on food security5
Firstly rejected, now supported by 15 MS
Increased possibility SUR to be blocked by MS ministers<br>
slide10. The European Parliament position Discussions in ComAgri and ComEnvi
Both of the will create their own positions in the 1st half of 2023
Possibility of SUR to be blocked by the EP<br>
slide11. Shall CAP compensate smooth transition to more sustainable use of pesticides? The Commission explicitly says that the additional regulatory costs could be compensated by the CAP budget
BUT:
the CAP budget is already allocated and most of the SP SPP approved
the CAP budget is quickly shrinking - high inflation reduces the real value of support<br>
slide12. Conclusion Even more sustainable use of PPPs - YES
BUT farmers depends on their income, therefore:
Impact assessment on EU food securitry to be done, including impact on economic situation of farmers and inhabitants
Farmers have to have tools to implement reduction (new machinery, new breeds, alternative substances)
It should be supported outside CAP (or to increase CAP budget)
Sensitive areas have to be identified on scientific basis<br>
slide13. Thank you for your attention! Ján Baršváry Slovak Chamber of Agriculture and Food barsvary@sppk.sk<br>