Pesticide Lobby's Influence on Farmer Protests and EU Regulations

In spring 2025, Croplife Europe commissioned an IPSOS survey to gauge farmers' perceptions of EU actions following recent protests. Conducted among nearly 2,000 farmers across nine EU countries—France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Ireland, and Romania—the survey aimed to demonstrate that farmers might protest again, potentially influencing EU regulatory policies. Critics, including Kees Jansen, an associate professor at Wageningen University, have labeled the survey as fundamentally flawed, arguing that it serves Croplife Europe's agenda to undermine EU environmental policies.

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

Jansen highlighted several methodological issues with the IPSOS survey. The selection of countries was criticized for being unrepresentative of the EU as a whole, as it focused on those with larger farmer protests. The survey's web intercept method, which utilized online platforms for distribution, raised questions about the representativeness of the sample. Notably, the average farm size of respondents was significantly larger than national averages, suggesting a bias towards larger agricultural operations that typically align more closely with the pesticide industry's interests.

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

The IPSOS report indicated that 82% of farmers sought economic support from the EU, with a significant number prioritizing the simplification of administrative procedures. However, the survey's framing of questions may have skewed the results. In contrast, a separate survey by More in Common revealed that a majority of farmers viewed ecological transition as an opportunity or necessity. This discrepancy suggests that the IPSOS survey may not fully capture the diverse needs and perspectives of the farming community.

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

While the IPSOS survey presented a narrative of alignment between farmers' needs and the pesticide industry's interests, it failed to address significant divergences. For instance, Croplife Europe has historically opposed measures to prevent imports of food with pesticide residues banned in the EU, which contradicts the interests of farmers advocating for fairer market conditions. This omission raises concerns about the survey's ability to accurately reflect the complexities of farmers' demands.

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

Critics argue that the IPSOS survey misrepresents the causes of farmer protests by attributing them primarily to EU policies, neglecting other contextual factors such as national economic pressures and local agricultural challenges. Jansen emphasized that the survey's conclusions could mislead policymakers into believing that EU regulations are the sole source of discontent among farmers.

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

At the launch of the IPSOS report, EU Commissioner Hansen acknowledged the need for better regulation of imports to protect both environmental goals and farmers' interests. However, the lack of a comprehensive policy action recommendation in the survey raises questions about its effectiveness in guiding future EU agricultural policy.

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

• “the study appears to advance CropLife Europe’s agenda to paint EU environmental policies as outdated and subject to change” — Kees Jansen, Associate Professor, Wageningen University

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

• “farm closures are a long-term outcome of structural political-economic processes of economic pressure and scale enlargement in agriculture. Such developments cannot plausibly change within the one-year scope of the study” — Kees Jansen, Associate Professor, Wageningen University

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

• “Tackling this would have dual benefits: enabling better protection of environmental goals and creating fairer market conditions for farmers.” — EU Commissioner Hansen

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations

Discrepancies exist between the IPSOS survey's findings and those of other surveys regarding farmers' views on ecological transition and economic support. The lack of transparency in the survey's methodology and the omission of critical contextual factors contribute to a gap in understanding the true motivations behind farmer protests.

Pesticide lobby instrumentalising farmer protests in its attack on EU health regulations