Ana P. Cione, Gustavo S. Santos, Mario del Giudice Paniago, Marina Sales, Fábio Casallanovo
{"title":"A new regulatory paradigm for pesticide registration in Brazil: Comments on recent legislative amendments (Law 14.785/2023)","authors":"Ana P. Cione, Gustavo S. Santos, Mario del Giudice Paniago, Marina Sales, Fábio Casallanovo","doi":"10.1002/ieam.4923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Brazil, a country of immense ecological diversity, has emerged as a global agricultural powerhouse, playing a pivotal role in international food production (Ballarin et al., <span>2023</span>). With over 20% of the world's species thriving in its six biomes (Ministério do Meio-Ambiente e Mudança do Clima, <span>2024</span>), any changes to Brazil's regulatory framework that impacts its agricultural and livestock production can have far-reaching global implications (Abessa et al., <span>2019</span>; Fearnside, <span>2016</span>). This is particularly true for the regulation and registration of pesticides, a crucial aspect of Brazil's agricultural paradigm, given its status as one of the world's major food exporters (Oliveira et al., <span>2014</span>).</p><p>On 27 December 2023, the Brazilian National Congress approved a new regulation for pesticide registration in Brazil, embodied by Law 14.785 (Brasil, <span>2023</span>). The new Brazilian law represents a scientific shift in paradigm, particularly given that it now mandates the inclusion of pesticide risk assessments—encompassing both human and environmental assessments—as integral components of the dossier submission process. Before this legislative revision, the evaluation of pesticides' risks concerning human health and the environment was solely predicated on hazard classification, based on the outcome of toxicological and ecotoxicological studies that are part of the dossier submission. Consequently, this regulatory update holds the potential to align the Brazilian regulatory framework more closely with those of more established systems, such as those implemented in Europe and the United States. The primary objective of this letter is to discuss the recent regulatory shift. The authors do not intend to apply any judgments, even implications and/or impacts of this regulatory shift. The purpose of informing is to communicate and provide awareness at this point. The authors also plan to publish other papers where more detailed information will be provided per compartment (e.g., birds and mammals, soil organisms).</p><p>Based on the considerations above, the authors believe that from a technoregulatory point of view, there are elements for establishing Tier 1 (screening level) for aquatic organisms, soil organisms, birds, and mammals. At the same time, the implementation of higher tiers needs more discussion. Ideally, these discussions should include the regulatory agencies, academia, and the regulated sector, aiming to address current knowledge gaps and the implementation of a tiered ERA scheme that not only considers the local reality but can protect the environment while still supporting Brazilian agriculture.</p><p>In conclusion, the newly established paradigm constitutes a significant transformation within Brazil's technical and regulatory landscape. This shift heralds the potential requirement for environmental research involving novel species. As previously delineated, implementing standardized ecotoxicological tests for local and new species is financially and temporally demanding, escalating the complexity of study design, execution, and subsequent interpretation. These factors suggest that ERA could be a powerful tool in bolstering Brazil's sustainability objectives, acknowledging that sustainability is an amalgamation of environmental, societal, and economic aspects.</p><p><b>Ana P. Cione</b>: Conceptualization; writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. <b>Gustavo S. Santos</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Mario del Giudice Paniago</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Marina Sales</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Fábio Casallanovo</b>: Writing—review and editing.</p><p>All authors declare that the Syngenta companies employ them as declared in their affiliations.</p>","PeriodicalId":13557,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","volume":"20 3","pages":"595-597"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ieam.4923","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ieam.4923","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Brazil, a country of immense ecological diversity, has emerged as a global agricultural powerhouse, playing a pivotal role in international food production (Ballarin et al., 2023). With over 20% of the world's species thriving in its six biomes (Ministério do Meio-Ambiente e Mudança do Clima, 2024), any changes to Brazil's regulatory framework that impacts its agricultural and livestock production can have far-reaching global implications (Abessa et al., 2019; Fearnside, 2016). This is particularly true for the regulation and registration of pesticides, a crucial aspect of Brazil's agricultural paradigm, given its status as one of the world's major food exporters (Oliveira et al., 2014).
On 27 December 2023, the Brazilian National Congress approved a new regulation for pesticide registration in Brazil, embodied by Law 14.785 (Brasil, 2023). The new Brazilian law represents a scientific shift in paradigm, particularly given that it now mandates the inclusion of pesticide risk assessments—encompassing both human and environmental assessments—as integral components of the dossier submission process. Before this legislative revision, the evaluation of pesticides' risks concerning human health and the environment was solely predicated on hazard classification, based on the outcome of toxicological and ecotoxicological studies that are part of the dossier submission. Consequently, this regulatory update holds the potential to align the Brazilian regulatory framework more closely with those of more established systems, such as those implemented in Europe and the United States. The primary objective of this letter is to discuss the recent regulatory shift. The authors do not intend to apply any judgments, even implications and/or impacts of this regulatory shift. The purpose of informing is to communicate and provide awareness at this point. The authors also plan to publish other papers where more detailed information will be provided per compartment (e.g., birds and mammals, soil organisms).
Based on the considerations above, the authors believe that from a technoregulatory point of view, there are elements for establishing Tier 1 (screening level) for aquatic organisms, soil organisms, birds, and mammals. At the same time, the implementation of higher tiers needs more discussion. Ideally, these discussions should include the regulatory agencies, academia, and the regulated sector, aiming to address current knowledge gaps and the implementation of a tiered ERA scheme that not only considers the local reality but can protect the environment while still supporting Brazilian agriculture.
In conclusion, the newly established paradigm constitutes a significant transformation within Brazil's technical and regulatory landscape. This shift heralds the potential requirement for environmental research involving novel species. As previously delineated, implementing standardized ecotoxicological tests for local and new species is financially and temporally demanding, escalating the complexity of study design, execution, and subsequent interpretation. These factors suggest that ERA could be a powerful tool in bolstering Brazil's sustainability objectives, acknowledging that sustainability is an amalgamation of environmental, societal, and economic aspects.
Ana P. Cione: Conceptualization; writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. Gustavo S. Santos: Writing—review and editing. Mario del Giudice Paniago: Writing—review and editing. Marina Sales: Writing—review and editing. Fábio Casallanovo: Writing—review and editing.
All authors declare that the Syngenta companies employ them as declared in their affiliations.
期刊介绍:
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM) publishes the science underpinning environmental decision making and problem solving. Papers submitted to IEAM must link science and technical innovations to vexing regional or global environmental issues in one or more of the following core areas:
Science-informed regulation, policy, and decision making
Health and ecological risk and impact assessment
Restoration and management of damaged ecosystems
Sustaining ecosystems
Managing large-scale environmental change
Papers published in these broad fields of study are connected by an array of interdisciplinary engineering, management, and scientific themes, which collectively reflect the interconnectedness of the scientific, social, and environmental challenges facing our modern global society:
Methods for environmental quality assessment; forecasting across a number of ecosystem uses and challenges (systems-based, cost-benefit, ecosystem services, etc.); measuring or predicting ecosystem change and adaptation
Approaches that connect policy and management tools; harmonize national and international environmental regulation; merge human well-being with ecological management; develop and sustain the function of ecosystems; conceptualize, model and apply concepts of spatial and regional sustainability
Assessment and management frameworks that incorporate conservation, life cycle, restoration, and sustainability; considerations for climate-induced adaptation, change and consequences, and vulnerability
Environmental management applications using risk-based approaches; considerations for protecting and fostering biodiversity, as well as enhancement or protection of ecosystem services and resiliency.