Reauthorization of neonicotinoid pesticides

The reauthorization of neonicotinoid pesticides in France under a derogation clause in Article 6 of the agricultural emergency law has raised concerns about the ability to effectively monitor their environmental and health impacts. The law requires a monitoring council to examine these effects, relying on data from the phytopharmacovigilance system managed by Anses, the National Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health Safety.

Neonicotinoids and their history

Neonicotinoids, such as imidaclopride, thiamethoxam, and clothianidin, were authorized in the 1990s after an initial risk assessment that considered their impact on bees. However, beekeepers observed unusual disappearances of foragers near treated fields, leading to restrictions on the use of these pesticides on bee-attractive crops in 2013 and a full ban in 2018.

Risk assessment and authorization process

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) evaluates the tests conducted by manufacturers of active substances and performs a risk assessment to recommend approval to the European Commission. Each member state then decides on the authorization of commercial products containing these substances and sets conditions to ensure safety for users and the environment. In France, Anses is responsible for evaluating these products.

Importance of monitoring pesticide risks

Monitoring pesticide-related risks has become increasingly important as environmental policies aim to track effects on human health, biodiversity, water, soil, and air quality. This monitoring is used both to verify the consequences of existing policies and to gather knowledge needed to adjust them. The agricultural emergency law has reintroduced acetamiprid and flupyradifurone, placing responsibility on a monitoring council to examine the effects of these derogations.

Scientific challenges in monitoring

Detecting unintended effects early, distinguishing abnormal signals from natural fluctuations, attributing impacts to specific substances in environments contaminated by complex mixtures, and relating local observations to broader phenomena are significant scientific challenges. Ecotoxicology must expand its field of action to develop the knowledge, methods, and tools needed to understand the functioning of socio-ecosystems exposed to multiple chemical stresses.

Monitoring real-world effects on bees

The evaluation of pesticide-related risks for bees illustrates the difficulty in detecting behavioral, chronic, or physiological effects documented under controlled conditions in real-world monitoring systems. For example, the alteration of bee immunity can be detected in experimental settings using advanced technology, but it is much more difficult to detect in field conditions where bees are exposed to mixtures of substances at variable concentrations and other environmental factors influence their health.

Need for new monitoring tools

Identifying harmful effects documented experimentally requires developing new indicators and tools capable of more precisely measuring the behavior and physiology of bees on apiaries. These measurements rely on methodologies and equipment (bee counters, RFID chips, etc.) that go beyond the usual practices of bee colony monitoring and remain technically and economically difficult to deploy on a large scale.

Future challenges in environmental policy

The challenge of the coming years will be to build the knowledge, methods, and systems that allow the integration of a priori risk assessment and monitoring. The ability of science to support the evolution of environmental policies depends on this integration, as well as on the recognition of the investments it requires.