 |
 |
|
|
News Releases 31st October 2005 Crop Science & Technology 2005 Gets Underway The BCPC International Congress and Exhibition, Crop Science & Technology 2005, opened in style on Monday 31 October at the Scottish Exhibition and Conference Centre in Glasgow. Four keynote speakers took to the platform; each addressing a different aspect of the future of crop production. Professor Sir John Marsh examined the impact of the reformed Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on agriculture in an enlarged community. He explained that, whereas the unreformed CAP would have driven up costs as it encouraged investment in production, the reformed policy is creating an environment where farmers and other investors will have to pay attention to what the market will actually pay, not what politicians would like farmers to receive. This, he felt, provides a platform for development that is less insecure than one which is wholly at the mercy of political forces. Even the reformed CAP however offers higher prices than many of the new and applicant EU countries have enjoyed in the past so, he predicted, that there will be some increase in the output of major commodities. He also noted that there will be a powerful incentive for significant parts of the food industry to relocate to the East where labour and raw material costs are currently lower. However, that process will tend to generate increased costs in the new locations as wage levels rise, regulatory requirements become more stringent and land prices are forced up. A new equilibrium will emerge in which the new members take a larger share of the EU market but competitive businesses in the West continue to thrive. This scenario, however, is based on the assumption that the EU continues to impose sufficient tariff barriers to give preference to internal supplies – an assumption which Sir John felt was realistic in the short to medium term. But, he warned that longer term trade will be more liberal. Producers will need to see themselves not as Community suppliers but as world producers and greater attention will have to be given to adding value, through varieties that meet specific needs, through processing and by building up of reputation for quality, safety and reliability. He concluded, "Progress in this direction will not be driven by governments or pressure groups; it will depend upon entrepreneurial businesses that see themselves as world enterprises. The best the industry can hope for is that the entrenched interests of politicians and stakeholders will not prevent them moving forward." Dr Chris Brown, agricultural development manager for the supermarket group ASDA, delivered the retail perspective. He maintained that supply chains from farm to retailer have to become more aligned and that the first step has to be an understanding of consumer needs. He presented some fascinating research on the different types of consumer identifying eight groupings – Pester Power; Younger International Tastes; Pound Stretchers; Weight Watching; Quality First; Simple & Convenient; Conservative Cooks; Older & Traditional Tastes. "The first three of these are the fastest growing groups and represent the key consumer trends at present," he said. ASDA's consumer research has shown that people shop at multiple retailers because of convenience. This is the main factor in choice followed by range of products and price. The convenience factor, he suggested has to be extended to include meal preparation, as well as shopping ease and is a reflection on the desire of customers to use the limited resource of time according to their wishes. Customers also clearly identify retailers as guardians of food standards and see it as their job to make sure the food they sell is both safe and fresh. But what about ASDA's links with agriculture? Dr Brown said that UK farmers have to change. They need to see themselves as suppliers, not as customers. "A supplier mindset is very different," he said. "ASDA works with a few key suppliers who understand our business and the success factors that drive it. We are value retailers. This is not about cutting suppliers prices to the point of death. We offer volumes and growth that spread costs enabling us to meet our target prices (and offer customer value) and we also work with suppliers to take out costs." Dr Brown's vision of the future is one of closer alignment and sharing of information between the individual components in the supply chain – growers, processors and retailers. "Joint business planning will increasingly incorporate downstream suppliers such as plant breeders and agrochemical organisations," he said. "Rather than optimising components of a chain the emphasis will be on the whole chain's optimal performance. The key to this will be the development of trust through communication," he concluded. The third paper was given by Professor David Coggon from the UK's Medical Research Council's Epidemiology Resources Centre in Southampton. Professor Coggon is also chairman of the UK's Advisory Committee on Pesticides. He turned the spotlight on future developments in risk assessment for pesticides and said, "Regulatory risk assessment for pesticides is continually evolving, in response both to advances in scientific knowledge, and also to changes in public perceptions and expectations." Professor Coggon explained how public concern about environmental threats to health has increased over the past 50 years. "Interestingly, this has occurred at a time when overall mortality has been falling, and it is possible that because people now have a greater expectation of health and longevity, risks that in the past were considered negligible are now regarded as important," he suggested. "At the same time, there has been a growing emphasis on the rights and interests of the individual relative to those of society more generally. Thus, people are much less accepting of adverse impacts on their lives when they perceive no compensatory personal benefit." Looking in detail at three areas where developments are currently occurring, he clearly demonstrated some of the major challenges in ensuring that changes in regulation are not only based on sound science but are practical to implement. The three areas examined were, the assessment of health risks from mixtures of pesticides, comparative risk assessment for pesticides and the assessment and management of indirect effects on wildlife. He concluded that the aim of the regulators must be to ensure that controls on the sale and use of pesticides appropriately reflect societal values and, at the same time, are based on sound scientific evidence – a process that is continually evolving. Finally Bob Holm from the IR-4 project based in New Brunswick USA, brought a wider international scope to the session with his presentation; World Horticulture in Crisis. Dr Holm outlined the global problems that growers of minor crops are facing in dealing with weeds, pests and diseases and explained how the IR-4 Program has acted as a catalyst to help resolve some of these issues in the North American Free Trade Area and how it may provide a useful model for a more harmonised global approach to regulation. Growers of horticultural crops often do not have legal access to the crop protection products because the potential return on investment from sales in these relatively small speciality crop markets does not justify the incremental increase in the cost of data development by the crop protection industry. The problem is exacerbated by the range of different regulatory requirements and standards in different territories. Reviewing the work of the IR-4 Program he showed how it has worked with the US Environment Protection Agency to assist in the data development to support registration to help minor crop growers can get access to newer pesticide products with lower risk characteristics. IR-4 has pioneered the concept of crop groupings and representative crops and has become a model for intergovernmental cooperation with both the Canadian and Mexican regulatory authorities now closely involved. "Today regulators from Canada, Mexico and the US have made work sharing a way of doing business. Guidelines and report formats have been harmonised and a great deal of effort has gone in to harmonising risk assessments and into developing a method to statistically determine Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) based on field data," he explained. In summary, data sharing, crop grouping, representative crops, geographic zones for residue studies and standardising of MRLs allow for a more rapid integration of new, safer products. He suggested that the rate at which products are being labelled in one country compared to another causes a number of complications. "Although one country may have access to newer products that have lower risk characteristics, it may also preclude growers and exporters from using them if the produce is going to be shipped to countries that do not have MRLs established for these new products. Therefore, if a product could be registered globally, rather than segmented country by country, there will be no clear advantage for one country over another and the new safer products could be integrated more rapidly into production systems providing even greater protection of the applicators, consumers and the environment." |
|
|
For
further information contact: |
 |
|
| © BCPC |