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
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
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
27
