In November 2023, Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) voted to reject a proposed regulation on pesticides that could have had a profound impact on the amenity sector both in Europe and the UK.

The proposal was for a Sustainable Use of Plant Protection Products Regulation which would replace the current Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive.

Directive vs Regulation

A Directive is a legal act that tells EU member states what goals they must achieve but does not specify how this should be done. Each member state must then put into place national laws which enable them to meet the goals specified in the directive.

A Regulation is also a legal act but as well as telling member states what goals they must achieve it also specifies how this should be done. Unlike a directive it is directly applicable in every member state of the EU and does not require secondary national laws.

The current EU Directive on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides was introduced in 2009. Its purpose was to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides by reducing the risks and impacts of their use on human health and the environment, and promoting the use of integrated pest management (IPM) and alternative approaches to pesticides. The UK's Plant Protection Products (Sustainable Use) Regulations 2012 were the UK's method of achieving the goals set out within the EU's 2009 Directive. Even though the UK has now left the EU, the Plant Protection Products (Sustainable Use) Regulations 2012 remain one of the key laws for pesticide use in the UK.

Within the EU, each member state has its own equivalent of our PPP (Sustainable Use) Regulations so that the goals set in the Directive can be achieved throughout the union. In 2022, as part of the European Green Deal objectives, the European commission proposed changing the Directive into a Regulation that would be applicable in all member states. The aim was for it to reduce the variation in national implementation and enforcement of the Directive and to further reduce risks to human health and the environment.

The European Green Deal

The European Green Deal was introduced in 2020 and is a set of initiatives that aim to support the EU economy and help it to reach climate neutrality by 2050. Amongst others, it has objectives relating to farming, climate change, the circular economy and biodiversity.

The agricultural community in Europe voiced concerns about the proposed Regulation as they felt it could impact their ability to produce food competitively. But there would also have been a significant impact on the amenity industry as the proposed Regulation would have stopped the use of all plant protection products in sensitive areas. Sensitive areas refer to almost all land that would fall under the remit of the amenity sector. It includes:

• Areas used by the general public e.g. public parks and gardens, recreation or sports grounds and public paths
• Areas used by vulnerable groups
• Human settlements
• Urban areas covered by a watercourse or water feature
• Non-productive areas

This is not without precedent and a number of European member states have already implemented national legislation to either reduce or to ban the use of pesticides in amenity and other public areas. For example, France has gradually introduced legislation to ban pesticide use in public areas, leading to a 92% fall in non-agricultural pesticide use between 2009 and 2020 (Ministry of Agriculture and Food Sovreignty, 2022). Other countries that have similar legislation include Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Sweden. Some countries may only legislate at a local level and others have no legislation of this type. It is this type of variation in legislation that both prompted the proposal for a new Regulation and contributed to concerns regarding its content. Whilst some countries have actively worked to reduce or remove pesticides from amenity and other public areas, other countries view them as an integral component of an integrated approach to pest management.

In the end, the wording in the proposal was altered considerably so that neither stakeholders with environmental concerns, nor those with agronomic or economic concerns, felt able to support it. The proposal was rejected by 299 MEPs (48%), 207 (33%) supported the proposal and 121 (19%) abstained.

It is easy to see the significant impact the proposal could have had on Europe's amenity sector, but the impact would likely have reached the UK's amenity sector too. Not because the regulation would have been applicable in the UK, but because our ability to bring PPPs onto the UK market is so heavily dependent on the market dynamics in the EU. Quite simply, if there is no market for PPPs in our largest and closest trading partner, the value to manufacturers of supplying these products to the UK is severely reduced. With prohibitive costs and lengthy timescales, applying for and achieving authorisation of a PPP is not a project that is undertaken lightly.

As an example, the impact of the divergence in EU and UK regulatory decisions, alongside differences between UK countries, was a key reason for the recent decision to remove the herbicide Asulox® from the market in the UK. With no interest in this herbicide coming from the bigger market potential of the EU, the manufacturer simply could not justify the expense of the authorisation process for a relatively small industry (amenity and forestry) in a relatively small country (the UK).

For now, it looks like there will be no imminent resurrection of the proposal for a Sustainable Use Regulation in the EU, as a request to send the proposal back to the Environment Committee was also rejected. However, the EU's biodiversity and pesticide reduction targets still remain, so it is yet to be seen whether there will be subsequent EU wide proposals for legislation to enforce a unified approach to meeting these.

Sustainable direction for support and solutions

The EU position, to currently retain the existing Sustainable Use Directive but reject its conversion to a Regulation in the proposed form, does give some welcome space to develop effective Integrated Turf Management (ITM) strategies across the amenity sector.

That includes increased efforts to be more targeted and effective with responsible and sustainable pesticide use - which will be essential to mitigate further legislative imposition in the future.

However, the political desire to further reduce pesticide use has not gone away, particularly in sports turf and amenity areas with public access. While any EU decision does not directly apply in the UK, it will inevitably have an implication in the plant protection products that are available to turf and amenity managers.

There is a clear desire to reduce use of inputs and environmental impacts of managing turf across the amenity sector at all levels. To enable that, turf managers must utilise all the tools that can help them to make the best agronomic decisions to fit their situation at the time, whether that is a cultural or chemical solution.

Most UK greenkeepers and turf managers are, in many ways, already ahead of the curve in terms of responsible and sustainable use of inputs and products to produce consistently better turf surfaces demanded by today's players.

Increasingly, ITM strategies are looking to use the latest innovative chemistry in conjunction with novel biological plant protection products, as well as traditional greenkeeping practices. The emphasis is now to only use inputs, applied responsibly and appropriately, within an overall plan - Right product; Right time; Right place.

Syngenta research to meet responsible and sustainable turf management is now focused on enhancing the reliability of ITM strategies and how best to incorporate the potential of new biological products. Extensive trials for leatherjacket control, for example, have shown the hitherto hit or miss results with beneficial nematodes can be made far more consistent when used in combination with insecticide.

Along with the research and development of innovative new biological and chemical plant protection products comes the need for investment in tools to support decision making for when and how they should be used, and the technology to ensure their accurate application onto the intended target.

New digital decision support technology means that every Syngenta product will come with a dashboard of data-driven risk factors to help turf managers optimise choice and timing of when to use - or not to use - the product. Coupled to that is the Art of Application technology to assure accurate and targeted application, whatever the product.

Together, these measures will ensure turf can be managed responsibly and sustainably in the future and within a legislative framework. Allied to that, golf courses and many turf facilities offer the potential to positively manage out of play areas for ecological gain. The Operation Pollinator initiative has proven that active turf management for player satisfaction is entirely compatible with protecting and enhancing areas, to benefit overall biodiversity and the environment.

Syngenta welcomes positive decisions on the direction for responsible and sustainable product use within the turf industry. As an R&D led company, it will help to give a clear direction for future investment, and ensure we can continue to supply sports turf managers with solutions and support that will meet legislative and societal objectives for managing playing surfaces.

Amenity Forum viewpoint

The Amenity Forum have always encouraged regulation of the amenity market, both in terms of the supply and, equally importantly, the use and application of PPPs.

The recent vote amongst MEPs that led to a convincing decision to reject a move from a directive to a regulation has significant potential to alter the availability of PPPs in the UK. As such, it becomes more important still that the National Action Plan delivers on the needs to regulate the use of these important tools to ensure that they are sold and applied professionally.

Integrated approaches should remain front and centre of our collective thinking when considering best practice with a keen eye on projects - from concept through build and maintenance phases. It ought always to be the case however, that the importance of PPPs is not lost when considering future legislation. Science should always inform best practice and, in a world where growing environmental and political pressures are felt across our sector, we have to be very careful to balance the needs of our environment and those that live within it.

The Forum will have a keen interest in the developments that follow this important decision, but on the face of it, we see this as positive news - so long as member states and, ultimately, the UK government take the right steps to restrict and control the use of professional products to qualified and competent application specialists.