mmt. There, the use of dangerous pesticides bears particularly high risks for human health and the environment due to weak controls. In many of these countries the biodiversity is very high. For example in Brazil, which was literally inundated with 2,241 tonnes of pesticides based on neonicotinoids during the period examined. The suppliers: the Swiss Syngenta and the German Bayer Group.
According to our data, Syngenta is by far the largest exporter of neonicotinoids, which are banned in the EU. In autumn 2020, Syngenta subsidiaries in the EU reported exports of 3,426 tonnes of pesticide products containing a total of 551 tonnes of thiamethoxam - more than three quarters of the total amount of banned neonicotinoids exported from the EU. In second place is Bayer with a total of 138 tonnes of pesticide exports - including 60 tonnes of imidacloprid and clothianidin. The two companies have numerous production sites in Europe and were responsible for almost 90% of the exports of banned neonicotinoids during the investigation period.
Flood of pesticides for Brazil's soybean plantations
The fact that Syngenta tops this list can be traced back to a huge delivery of “Engeo Pleno S” to Brazil. In addition to thiamethoxam, the blockbuster also contains lambda cyhalothrin, a substance that is also highly toxic for bees. Most of these 2.2 million liters of pesticide products exported from Belgium are destined for Brazil's huge soy plantations and are sufficient to treat an area three times the size of the export country Belgium.
According to our research, exports of banned neonicotinoids from the EU also go to Africa: including to Kenya, where farmers report that they have to pollinate their plants by hand because bees and other important insects are disappearing. Ghana received at least 50 tons of insecticides with neonicotinoids from the EU in 2020. The pesticides that are used on a large scale on cocoa plantations pollute the soil and reduce its fertility.
A report published in 2019 by researchers from 17 African countries found that the increased use of neonicotinoids in Africa is restricting pollination and natural pest control, thereby endangering the continent's food security. The report calls on governments to prevent the indiscriminate use of neonicotinoids from further deteriorating the sustainability of agriculture and biodiversity in Africa.
No more hypocrisy
The EU itself considers the threat to be very serious: As part of its “Farm to Fork” strategy, the European Commission plans to stop the import of food if it contains traces of pesticides contribute to global environmental problems, especially the neonicotinoids. These "are particularly poisonous for bees and contribute significantly to the decline in pollinator populations," as the Commission writes on request. "We would find it unacceptable that the production of food for import into the EU [...] poses a serious threat to pollinator populations worldwide."
Despite this knowledge, the EU allows its own pesticide industry to continue producing these toxic substances on European soil and exporting them to countries outside the EU. However, a change of course is emerging: after we had already drawn attention to exports of banned pesticides last year, the European Commission surprisingly announced in October 2020 that it wanted to end this problematic practice. And in the spring of 2021, the EU Council “expressly” welcomed the endeavor to “take a leading role in the sensible handling of chemicals and waste” internationally. However, under pressure from various member states - in particular Germany, Italy and Hungary - the EU Council did not make a clear statement on a possible export ban, as the Commission had proposed.
©
The European Commission does not want to rush into anything: it is “too early” to pass an export ban on neonicotinoids.
UN Special Rapporteur wants to see action
The UN Special Rapporteur on Toxic Substances and Human Rights, Marcos Orellana, does not believe in these excuses. In June 2021, he called on the European institutions to get things done. In view of our latest research, he reiterates his demands: The EU must end the “externalization of health and environmental costs to the weakest”. It is "a form of exploitation."
Public Eye and Unearthed have asked the exporting countries for their comments. Hungary and Great Britain therefore consider the current system, which is based on the prior consent of the importing countries, to be sufficient. Belgium, Denmark and France
