Fake pesticides have infiltrated Europe’s crop protection industry, but have yet to establish a toehold in North America.
Up to seven percent of Europe’s pesticide market has been infiltrated by counterfeit products, says a report released by the European Crop Protection Association.
The illegally traded pesticides are untested and contain toxic elements that pose threats to farmers, consumers and the environment.
“For the first time we have a picture of the extent and impact of fake pesticides across Europe and the picture is frightening,” said Rocky Rowe, who is leading the association’s anti-counterfeit campaign.
Read Also
Stacking Canada up on gene editing livestock
Canada may want to gauge how Argentina and other countries have approached gene editing in livestock and what that has meant for local innovation.
Pierre Petelle, director of regulatory affairs with CropLife Canada, said the problem has been around for a while.
“But it looks like it is growing and in some cases, in certain parts of the world, exponentially.”
Fortunately, it is not an issue in Canada.
“There hasn’t been anything reported as far as we know,” said Petelle.
But with the increased international movement of agricultural chemicals, CropLife members are keeping their guards up.
“We’re watching it closely and we’re concerned about it.”
Petelle suspects the reason fake pesticides are cropping up in Europe and not in North America is its location near the manufacturing hotspots of the fraudulent product.
“It may just be a question of geography,” he said.
According to the European Crop Protection Association’s report, 86 percent of counterfeited goods seized in 2006 at EU borders came from China. There is also substantial influx from Eastern Bloc countries.
Case studies in the report include illegal repackaging in France and Germany, successful prosecutions in Greece and the United Kingdom, fields destroyed in Italy, France and Spain, and illegal warehouses in Poland and Ukraine containing more than 500 tonnes of fakes.
One particularly disturbing finding involved boxes containing five litre bottles of pesticide disguised as vegetable cooking oil. Had the product somehow found its way to grocery store shelves, consumers could have died.
The association is calling for “enforcement and political solutions” to block the trade in illegal product.
Petelle said there are financial ramifications for CropLife members in terms of lost sales as well as potential losses for the grain trade if a shipment is refused for containing traces of an unwanted chemical. If the problem gets bad enough, it will lead to reduced investment in new pesticides.
“But the more serious cost from our perspective is the potential safety issues,” he said.
Farmers can be at risk if they follow precautions for one active ingredient while unknowingly applying another, while consumers could be exposed to unsafe residue levels from an unregistered product.
CropLife has been discussing the issue with Canadian regulators and with its counterparts in the United States and is taking precautions.
“That’s one of the reasons the Grower Requested Own Use program was set up the way it was,” said Petelle.
The program allows producers to import select farm chemicals on their own initiative but only from the United States, which has a registration system that is similar to Canada’s, and only for products that have already been approved in Canada.
