Viewpoint: Pesticide regulations should assess societal context, not just safety

weedkiller superJumbo
Image credit: Emmanuel Dunand/AFP

Apart from the inherent scientific complexity, the glyphosate case illustrates a fundamental societal issue. The mere fact that the European Citizens’ Initiative attracted so many adherents is indicative of a wide societal aversion to the massive increase in the production of chemicals and their use in pesticide-based agricultural mass production. Public concern is not only limited to glyphosate but also covers other chemicals such as neonicotinoids, endocrine-disrupting compounds, and food additives.

Presently there is no societal assessment in pesticide registration. Recently, a promising framework for the combination of cost-benefit analyses with factors such as risk perception, uncertainty, and trust in regulatory decision-making on toxic substances in food, including pesticides, has been proposed. We argue that including such a framework in pesticide authorization would be an appropriate way to take factors such as citizens’ initiatives, societal attitudes toward agricultural chemicals, and economic benefits of chemical pest and weed control into account.

It is time for a new scheme for pesticide evaluation in which regulatory decision-making takes into account not only the technical evidence on safety but also the societal context in which decisions are made.

Read full, original post: Decision-making in a storm of discontent

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screen Shot at AM
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Right-wing politics bad for your health? Separating speculation from science
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-9-2026-01_11_37-PM
Turmeric supplements: More risks than benefits
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-10.02.22-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Industrial food’ primer—Challenging the dangerous delusions of the alternative food movement
newborn infant baby mother
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: The truth about vitamin K shots
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-15-2026-11_00_13-AM-2
Glucosamine alert: Alzheimer’s progresses faster among those taking the popular supplement
ChatGPT Image Jun 16, 2026, 12_03_37 PM
Kennedy accused of trying to ‘bully’ science journal that retracted study linking vaccines to infant deaths
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-15-2026-12_13_41-PM
Viewpoint: Behind the effort to re-purpose the tobacco attack strategy to fight ultra-processed foods
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-12.33.01-PM
Who’s responsible when AI lies? Google challenging court ruling that search results are not protected from legal liability
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-3-2026-04_29_13-PM
Viewpoint: While unvaccinated children are dying overseas, Congress challenges Trump and Kennedy’s block on aid
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-11.23.32-AM
In a rebuke to RFK, Jr.’s anti-vax crusade, journal retracts study claiming hepatitis B vaccine–autism link
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-12.46.54-PM
Viewpoint: “Dead Wrong”—Understanding healthcare’s misinformation epidemic
Screenshot-2026-06-05-at-2.12.30-PM
Some plants can poison you. So how did humans figure out what is safe to eat?
Screenshot-2026-06-14-at-9.53.54-AM
Is the World Cup a perfect storm for the spread of infectious diseases?
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.