The EUโs chemicals agency (ECHA) and Food Safety Authority (EFSA) are currently assessing the potential health and environmental risks linked to the controversial substance.
As the EUโs current authorisation for glyphosate as an active substance in plant protection is set to expire by December, the agenciesโ assessment was originally set to come in time to inform the decision for or against renewing the approval.
However, EFSA and ECHA announced on [May 10] that they had revised the timeline for the assessment and would not finalise the process before July 2023.
As the assessment would thus come half a year after the current authorisation ends, the Commission is now expected to propose a temporary extension of the approval to bridge the gap.
EURACTIV understands that this would be under the condition that the two agencies do not find urgent evidence of a serious risk posed by glyphosate in the meantime.
In a statement, EU Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakides said she was โdeeply concerned that the assessment of glyphosate is delayed.โ
According to a joint press statement put out by EFSA and ECHA, the delay is due to an โunprecedented number of commentsโ on a draft assessment report published in the summer of last year.
โUnprecedentedโ stakeholder feedback
This draft report had been drawn up by four member states โ France, Hungary, the Netherlands and Sweden โ which form the so-called Assessment Group on Glyphosate. EFSA and ECHA had then invited comments on the paper through public consultation.
While the mass of stakeholder feedback shows โthe high level of interest in this substance,โ comments and additional information submitted by experts and stakeholders amount to โa file of approximately 3,000 pages,โ the agencies explained.
This means that the four member states will need extra time to review the comments and update their draft assessment.
According to the agenciesโ revised timeline, this revised report will be submitted by the end of September. The EFSA will then launch a peer review process in November and December, consisting of an extensive series of consultations with the assessment group and national experts, before finally tabling its conclusions in mid-2023.
Share this article
While Kyriakides acknowledged โthe high interest in the assessment processโ and the โtruly unprecedented numberโ of stakeholder contributions, she said she had asked the agencies to โdo their utmost to complete their work as soon as possibleโ.
Split over the science
The large amount of information and comments submitted during the public consultations reflect how contentious the issue is: Stakeholders are polarised politically, butย also on the scientific evidenceย put forth to assess the potential risks of glyphosateโs use for plant protection.
While the EU agencies had previously concluded, for example, that there was โno evidenceโ to link glyphosate use to heightened cancer risk in humans, campaigners have criticised the agenciesโ assessment process for being based too strongly on industry-commissioned studies and ignoring long-term health and environmental risks.
Meanwhile, stakeholders were also split in how they received the delay and the temporary extension of the approval that could result from it.
In a statement, the Glyphosate Renewal Group โ the group of agrochemical companies which together are applying for the substanceโs renewed approval โ said it โrecognises that such procedural delays, together with an extension of the current approval period, are standard practices of the EU regulatory process.โ
It also called the new timeline an โexpression of a very transparent procedure that provides the opportunity for all interested parties to take part in the process.โ
Campaigners, on the other hand, called to speed up the process.
โThere is today enough evidence in the scientific literature pointing to the toxicity of glyphosate both on citizensโ health and the environment,โ Martin Dermine, policy officer at the Pesticide Action Network Europe, told EURACTIV.
He called on the EFSA to โproduce a statement on the non-industry findings before the end of the year so that the European Commission and the Member States drop the idea of prolonging the approvalโ.
