The Ripple Effect of Pesticide Use on Your Farm: The Importance of MRLs

Gord Kurbis

Director, Market Access

and Trade Policy

Pulse Canada

January 10, 2018

Corey Loessin

Chair, Saskatchewan

Pulse Growers

Director, Pulse

Canada

Outline

MRLs backgrounder

Supply chain disruption: commercial

example

Beginning of structural shift in marketplace,

international grower and trade coalitions

Current approach to managing risks

Importance of following labels

Example: Glyphosate / EU / Lentils

High profile noncompliance in early 2011

EU second largest market for pulses

3

Costs Actions

Rejected cargo

Product recalls

Re-selling distressed

cargo

Demurrage, interest

Handling and

segregation programs

Rapid testing tool for

industry

Ring test of lab accuracy

Grower communications

Desiccation trials

Example cont’d: Glyphosate / EU / Lentils

• 0.1 ppm default MRL, later revised by EFSA by a factor of

100 to 10 ppm

• Lesson learned: non food safety issue can be treated as a

serious food safety issue with serious disruption to trade,

threat of retail shelf recalls

(10)

Annual MRL Advisories

Is not using available technology an

acceptable long-term solution?

Canadian farmers spend more than:

• $2.3 billion a year on crop protection products

• $1.9 billion on seeds with novel traits

Investments in crop protection and biotechnology are

estimated by CropLife Canada to result in:

• Increased yield - 42% more grain (wheat, corn, canola, barley,

etc.)

• Improved environmental sustainability – 35 million more acres

would need to be in production in Canada if these products not

used

• Lowers the cost of production – benefiting growers and

consumers - Savings on food that requires wheat flour or soy

may be as high as 69%

IYP2016 The 68th UN

General Assembly

declared 2016 the

International Year

of Pulses Pulse Feast

36 countries|141 Events

Reach of 21 million people

IYP Signature Events

World’s Greatest Pulse Dishes (300+ recipes)

OBJECTIVES

• Raise awareness on the role of pulses in sustainable

food production and healthy diets and their

contribution to food security and nutrition;

• Promote the value and utilization of pulses

throughout the food system

• Encourage connections throughout the food chain to

further global production of pulses, foster enhanced

research, better utilize crop rotations and address the

challenges in the trade of pulses

Thematic Areas

IYP2016 The 68th UN

General Assembly

declared 2016 the

International Year

of Pulses Pulse Feast

36 countries|141 Events

Reach of 21 million people

IYP Signature Events

World’s Greatest Pulse Dishes (300+ recipes)

OBJECTIVES

• Raise awareness on the role of pulses in sustainable

food production and healthy diets and their

contribution to food security and nutrition;

• Promote the value and utilization of pulses

throughout the food system

• Encourage connections throughout the food chain to

further global production of pulses, foster enhanced

research, better utilize crop rotations and address the

challenges in the trade of pulses

Thematic Areas

What is an MRL?

MRL = Maximum Residue Limit

MRLs are the upper limits

residues that can be found

when label followed

Importing countries

increasingly use different

approaches to setting

MRLs

Increasingly complex

MRL

Hazard Assessment

Dietary Exposure

Assessment

100+

crops x 400+

active ingredients

= numerous MRL combinations

Source: “Pesticide use and food safety,” European Crop Protection Association

Measuring residue levels

Source: “Pesticide use and food safety,” European Crop Protection Association

Measuring residue levels

Source: “Pesticide use and food safety,” European Crop Protection Association

Measuring residue levels

Structural shift in in trading environment

1. More missing MRLs and application of zero- or

near-zero defaults

2. Residue testing more sensitive

3. Heightened monitoring/testing

Key point: meeting MRLs is not the problem; it is meeting the near-zero

default tolerances that apply when an MRL has not been established.

Results from Quick, Easy, Cheap,

Effective, Rugged, and Safe (QuEChERS)

technique followed by analysis with a

Triple Quadrupole Gas Chromatograph

coupled with a Tandem Mass

Spectrometer (GC-MS/MS).

Can identify over 260

pesticide residues per

crop at well below 1

ppb with a good level

of selectivity.

Residue testing more sensitive

More missing MRLs – prevalence of

national MRL lists

Number of countries – no weighting

Other

National, Codex

National

EU deferral

Codex andCodexrecommended

* All agri-food products2015 Canadian Export Destinations – 91 Countries

I

National MRL

lists by

individual

countries are

now the

majority of

the value

traded

globally*

Which countries does this affect?

NorthAmerica

Caribbean

CentralAmerica

SouthAmerica

NorthAfrica

Sub-SaharanAfrica

Europe

RussiaUkraine

EastAsia

SoutheastAsia

Oceania

SouthAsia

MiddleEast

Imported

Exported

Source of image: International Grains Council

47%

23%

13%

9%

4%2%2%

2

United States Taiwan

EU Canada

Japan Australia

Hong Kong

Publicly reported global MRL noncompliances

Total number of

noncompliances

reported during

the most recent

year of publicly

available data:

2,907

MRL violations for most recent one-year period with available data. US: October 1, 2013 – September 30, 2014; Canada: April 1 2013 – March

31, 2014; Australia, EU, Hong Kong, Japan, & Taiwan: July 1, 2016 until June 30, 2017.

Proportion of MRL noncompliances due to

no MRL or default – provisional

7% 12%

38%

16% 19%13%

93% 88%

62%

84% 81%87%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

US(1379 total)

Taiwan(733 total)

EU(365 total)

Japan(121 total)

Australia(75 total)

TOTAL(2673 total)

Exceeds MRL No MRL or defaultMRL violations for most recent one-year period with available data. US: October 1, 2013 – September 30, 2014; Australia, EU, Japan, & Taiwan: July 1,

2016 until June 30, 2017. Taiwan and Japan violations of 0.01 ppm or less marked as “No MRL or default”

MRL Noncompliances by Country of Origin

Country Violations

1. China 380

2. Mexico 355

3. United States 292

4. India 250

5. Turkey 136

6. Japan 130

7. Vietnam 128

MRL violations for most recent one-year period with available data. US: October 1, 2013 – September 30, 2014; Canada: April 1 2013 – March

31, 2014; Australia, EU, Hong Kong, Japan, & Taiwan: July 1, 2016 until June 30, 2017.

China, 380

Mexico, 355

United States, 292

India, 250

Turkey, 136Japan, 130Vietnam, 128

Thailand, 93

Canada, 82

Egypt, 70

Hong Kong, 66

Pakistan, 65

Peru, 53

Israel, 48

Korea, 47

Chile, 45Australia, 40

Italy, 38Dominican Republic, 37

Ecuador, 32

France, 31

Other, 480

International Grain Trade Coalition

• Formed in 2001 to advise governments on implementation of the

Biosafety Protocol; mandate broadened to focus on the goal of

avoiding disruptions in the international trade of grain, oilseeds,

pulses and derived products.

• Position highlights:

• All countries to use available Codex MRLs as an automatic,

interim measure until the country in question completes its

evaluation process and formally establishes an MRL.

• Address unnecessary time delays to adoption of a Codex MRL

where prior assessments by member countries (e.g., global joint

reviews) could form the basis of a Codex assessment.

• Explore harmonized approached to MRL setting among the

parties, such as agreement on workable elements of a policy on

mutual recognition of MRLs or MRL equivalence.

Members of International MRL Coalition*• Global Farmer Network

• International Citrus Growers

• Global Pulse Confederation (GPC)

• Global Dairy Platform (GDP)

• International Food and Beverage Alliance (IFBA)

• International Grain Trade Coalition (IGTC)

• International Organization of Spice Trade Associations (IOSTA)

• International Seed Federation (ISF)

• International Trade Center (affiliated with WTO and UNCTAD)

• International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)

• International Fertilizer Association (IFA)

• CropLife International

• Grain and Feed Trade Association (GAFTA)

• HealthforAnimals

• Himalayan Apple Growers Society (HAGS)

• International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), member of the CGIAR

• European Coffee Federation

• FoodDrinkEurope on behalf of Federation of Cocoa Commerce and CAOBisco

• Canadian Canola Growers Association

• The Coca-Cola Company

• Inter-American Insitute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA)

• Minor Crop Farmers Alliance (MCFA)

• PepsiCo

• Rural Women in Agriculture

• Tea Association of Canada

• U.S. Soybean Export Council (USSEC)

• U.S Sustainability Alliance

• World Spices Organisation* International Agri-Food Network’s “Coalition for an Enhanced Codex”

MRL case studies underway by IAFN coalition

• Quinoa,

Peru;

• Peas and

Beans,

Kenya;

• Cranberries,

US

• Others TBC

Managing Risk of

Noncompliance• Short term: ensure no unacceptable

level of trade risk:

• Balance, not eliminate, trade risk

• www.keepingitclean.ca

• Medium term: work to attain the

required MRL (if possible)

• Longer term: broader, multi-

commodity, multi-country efforts to

advocate for harmonization of MRLs

through improved institutions

(Codex), regulatory cooperation,

trade agreements, etc.

Declarations

• Examples of issues

• Clever®, canola

• Elatus™, pulses

Importance of sticking to the label

• Contact vs. systemic products

• Some products are politically

sensitive

• Glyphosate in particular is very

sensitive in EU

Conclusions, next steps

• Not food safety issue – similar to GM crops

• We will continue to hear more about MRLs

• Ongoing efforts to get in front of the problem

• Annual advisory and diverse working group

• International coalition work

• Continue to have working group balance trade risk

so farmers do not lose access to products

• Need to pay attention to labels, especially with

politically sensitive active ingredients

• Role of groups like SPG, Pulse Canada

Questions

29