A survey on the uses of glyphosate in European countries

Antier, Clémentine [UCL] Andersson, R. [Jordbruksverket] Auskalnienė O. [LAMMC] Barić, K [AGRES] Baret, Philippe [UCL] et al.

In 2019, the ENDURE network3launched a survey on the agricultural use of glyphosatein European countries. This report presents the results obtained through the surveyand proposes a framework for understanding and monitoring glyphosate uses.The share of herbicides among all pesticide sales varies from one country to another. It is particularly high in Sweden (where herbicides represented 85% of the total volume of pesticides sold in 2017), Norway (83%), Denmark (82%), Estonia (76%), Ireland (73%), Latvia (73%), Lithuania (63%), United Kingdom (62%) and Poland (61%) and is particularly low in Malta (2%), Cyprus (13%) and Italy (17%).When reported by hectare of agricultural area, the countries with the highest average use of herbicides are Belgium, Netherlands, Cyprus, France, Germany, Denmark and Poland. The average use of herbicides in the agricultural sector at the EU 28+3 level can be estimated at0.62kgof a.i. per hectare. The total volume of herbicides sold in all EU 28+3 countries remained rather stable from 2011 to 2017, while atthe national level, herbicide sales numbers showed a high degree of fluctuation. The ENDURE survey made it possibleto collect data on glyphosate sales in 25countries. In addition, an estimation was calculatedfor the other sevencountriesfor whichno data could be obtained.The total sales of glyphosate are estimated at 46,527 tonnes of a.i. in 2017 across the EU 28+3 (47,452tonnes of a.i. across the EU 28+4). Overall, sales of glyphosate represent33% of total herbicide salesin the EU 28+3. Therefore, glyphosate is one of the most widely used herbicidesin European agriculture.Similarto overall herbicide sales, glyphosate sales (in volume of active ingredients) appear to be the highest in France (20% ofthe EU 28+4 total glyphosate sales volumein 2017), Poland (14%), Germany (10%), Italy (8%) andSpain (8%). Glyphosate represents15% to 78% of total herbicide active ingredient sales in the countriessurveyed. According to the survey, glyphosate is mainly used inthe agricultural sector. Across the 13countries for which the share of glyphosate sales tothe agriculturalsector was available, the agricultural sector consumes on average 90% of total national glyphosate sales (byvolume). When reportedby hectare of agricultural area, the average use of glyphosate at the EU 28+3 level is 0.20kg a.i.per hectare.The five countries with the highest use of glyphosate in 2017 were Denmark, Poland, Netherlands, Portugal and France (≥0.32 kg of a.i. per ha). The five countries with the lowest use of glyphosate were Turkey, Lithuania, Latvia, UK and Switzerland (≤0.12 kg of a.i. per ha)4. This report offersa framework for understanding and monitoring glyphosate usesin the agricultural sector, based on the identification of the cropping systems in which glyphosate is used, the agronomicpurposesfor which it is usedandthe nature of this use (from occasional to systematic).Glyphosate is widely used in annual cropping systems, perennial cropsand grasslands. In annual cropping systems, it is mostly usedprior to sowing, shortly after sowing of thecrop (at the pre-emergence stage) or at the post-harvest stagefor controlling weeds and volunteers.Annual cropping systems in which glyphosate is used include a large variety of crops (such as maize, oilseed rape, cereals, legume crops, sugar and fodderbeet etc.).It is also used for the destruction of cover crops, and for ensuring the desiccation of certain annual crops at the pre-harvest stage.In perennial crops (such as vineyards, fruit orchards, olives grovesetc.), glyphosateis used forcontrollingweedswithin or between crop rows. Finally, glyphosateis used for the destruction of temporary grassland, for local control ofperennial weedsin permanent grasslandand for grassland renewal. Overall, the survey shows that the herbicide is used for at least eightagronomic purposes.Statistical data regarding glyphosate use in annual cropping systemsis limited. In addition,the allocation of glyphosate treatments that are applied in the intercroppingperiod may vary across countries. Four different allocation rules were identified through the survey: allocation from harvest to harvest, allocation from field preparation to post-harvest treatments, allocation tothe intercropperiod andallocation to the cropping system. In some countries, severalallocation rules may apply depending on the statisticaldataset.As a consequence,comparisons of glyphosate uses in annual cropping systems between countries or crops must be considered as a preliminary indication. Within the scope for which datacould be obtained through the survey,32% of the wheat acreage, 25% of the maizeacreageand 52% of the oilseed rapeacreage were treated with glyphosatein any single year. Thetreated acreagevaries greatly from one country to another:the useof glyphosate in maize fields was almost inexistent insome countries, while it reachedup to 40% of the crop area inother countries. In oilseed rape fields, the share of the croparea treated with glyphosate variedfrom less than 10% to more than 70%. Similarly, in winter wheat fields, the share ofthe crop area onwhich glyphosate is used variedfrom lessthan 10% to 90%.Those percentages include: treatments for controlling weeds applied before cultivation (at the pre-sowing or pre-emergence stage) that may occur for each new sowingin the crop rotation; treatments for controlling weeds that are applied only once in the crop rotation(at a post-harvest stage or during an intercropping period); and desiccation/harvest aid for some of the crops (in countries in which this is allowed). As the percentages are for any single year, the area treated with glyphosatein any region over a full crop rotation periodmay be greater. Additional research is needed for assessing the total uses of glyphosate throughout the crop rotations in EU countries.In perennial systems, withinthe scopefor which data was availablein the EU 28+4, 39% of the fruit orchard acreage, 32% of the vineyard acreageand45% of the olive groveacreage weretreated with glyphosate. Across countries, the use of glyphosate rangedfrom 13% to 95% of the national vineyardacreage, from 20% to 92% of the fruit orchard acreage and from 13% to 80% ofthe olive groveacreage. Finally,19% of the temporary grassland acreagewas treated with glyphosate annually. A diversity of non-chemical alternatives to glyphosate treatments can beidentified. Their effectiveness, cost and adoption implications for crops and the environment can vary widely, or may not be quantified. They includeboth preventive measures and curative control measures, such as mechanical and biological control.In annual cropping systems,thesepractices include: use of cover crops and of a roller-crimper for their destruction,mulching,crop rotationdiversification, delaying crop sowing dates, higher seed rates, increasingcrop competitiveness, inter-row cultivation, tillage for controlling weeds at the post-harvest and pre-sowing stages, use ofearly-ripening varietiesand weed seed removal during 10harvest.In perennial crops, the following alternatives were identified: greening, grazing, mowing, mulching, cover crops, tillage, mechanical weeding and the use of bioherbicides for weed control.Different approaches tousing glyphosatewere identified through the survey. Occasional usesare related to exceptional contexts, such as meteorological conditions or specific farm constraints. Recurrent usesare widespread practices that are already embedded in farming systems.Otheragronomic solutions may exist but are not mobilised; instead farmersplan to,and recurrentlydo,useglyphosate. Two types of recurrent uses can be distinguished: uses related to structural conditionsand systematic uses that are not related to structural conditions.First, uses related to structural conditionsappearwhenequipmentor infrastructureare not compatible with alternative practices. Examples of such structural conditionsinclude irrigation systems that are located above ground in fruit orchards andnarrow rows in orchards or vineyardswhich prevent weed management usingmechanical methods. For replacing glyphosate withnon-chemical alternatives, achange in these structural aspects isrequired, which may involvesignificant investments.Second, systematic uses not related to structural conditionsresult from the evolution of farming systems generally characterised by reduced tillage systems, large-scalefarms and the availability of highly efficient, low-priced herbicides such as glyphosate. Examples of systematic uses include the use of glyphosate for cropdesiccation,for the destruction of cover crops and temporary grasslands,and for weed management in annual and perennial crop systems.In the case of systematic uses, multiple inter-related factors may hinder the shift to non-chemical alternatives. These include:limited, and in some cases no,availability of and accessto alternative inputsand adapted machinery;constraints and opportunities due to regulations and subsidies;lack of advice, knowledge and referencesregarding alternative practices;uncertainties, risks and variability inagronomic performanceand profitabilityof alternative practices; constraints in farm resources; commercial context;challenges in terms of labour organisation; and cultural and cognitive aspects. Further research is needed to assess the conditions, including the economic and technical aspects as well as systemic contexts, that are required for enhancing the adoption of non-chemical alternatives to glyphosate.