Compiled 10 February, updated 1 March 2026
Repubblica on 9 February 2026 headlines: Mercosur, the EU tightens up. Provisional application is being studied in the corridors of Brussels to speed up the treaty’s timeframe
(and in fact this was the case and in this regard read also Mercosur : why it is going ahead)
On this subject a short time ago we had written:
Brazil’s major grain traders abandon Amazon preservation pact
Abiove, which includes ADM (ADM.N), Bunge (BG.N), whose members include Cargill, Cofco and Louis Dreyfus, confirmed that it had ‘initiated talks’ to leave the pact, which is supported by the federal government and environmental groups.
The WWF said in a note that the decision was a setback for the environment.
The companies’ exit from the pact ‘weakens one of the most effective tools to combat deforestation in the country’ and exposes farmers to increasing climate risks, WWF said Reuters
Mercosur : pesticides and hormones in food ?
amicarbazone herbicide, chlorothalonil fungicide, novaluron insecticide and growth hormones in meat? It would seem so although they should be respected
1) the precautionary principle, i.e. any food may only be placed on the market if it poses no health risk, and 2) the obligation to indicate the country of origin on the label
Milena Gabbanelli, Corriere della Sera 19 January 2026
P.S.: Brazil’s JBS is the third largest producer of food and the first of meat in the world
In Brazil, the EU-Mercosur agreement will lead to ‘development in agriculture on unexploited land, particularly in the Amazon’.
Larissa Mies Bombardi is a Brazilian geographer, currently a lecturer at the Free University of Brussels. This specialist in environmental issues in the agricultural trade denounces, in an interview with ‘Le Monde’, Europe’s hypocrisy on these issues.
Larissa Mies Bombardi is a geographer at the Free University of Brussels. Author of, among others, the essay *Pesticides: a chemical colonialism* (Anacaona, 2024), she studies how the European chemical industry exports to Brazil products banned in Europe. A long-time lecturer at the prestigious University of São Paulo, she was forced to seek refuge in Europe in 2021 after receiving numerous threats, including imprisonment in her home during which her computer was stolen. She discusses the potential environmental consequences of the trade agreement between the European Union (EU) and Mercosur.
What will be the ecological consequences of this agreement?
On the Brazilian side, the main beneficiary of this agreement will be the agri-food sector, which should increase its sales [the value of exports to the EU The first consequence is therefore a possible expansion of agriculture on uncultivated land, particularly in the Amazon, where soya, cattle and sugar cane crops are being expanded. This increase in sales also implies an intensification of pesticide use [according to the Brazilian Agricultural Research Society, between 2010 and 2020, herbicide use increased by 128%, while the country’s cultivated area increased by only 19.5%].
What is the current impact of pesticide use in Brazil?
Over the last decade, more than 56,000 Brazilians have been poisoned by pesticides. Of these, 18% are between 0 and 19 years old. However, the Ministry of Health estimates that only 1 in 50 cases are actually reported. This means that this number probably represents only 2% of the real total [which is estimated to be over 2.8 million people]. Furthermore, in my research, I calculated that every two days a Brazilian dies from pesticide poisoning.
You denounce the hypocrisy of the European Union on this issue. Why?
Take the example of soya. The EU does not allow the cultivation of genetically modified organisms on its territory, but allows their use in animal feed. Europe therefore imports soya from Brazil and other Mercosur countries, almost entirely genetically modified. Being modified, this soya requires the addition of pesticides: in Brazil, more than half is used to cultivate this seed. Some of these chemical inputs come from European factories, which even export banned products within the European Union [in 2021, the EU exported 6,840 tonnes of banned products within its territory to Mercosur, equivalent to about 5% of Brazil’s annual consumption]. I have already raised this issue several times with representatives of the European Commission. The answer I receive is that the EU respects the sovereignty of the member states, which are free to import as they see fit….
However, the Lula government, despite its declared interest in environmental protection, was also pushing for the signing of an agreement…
The Lula government is committed to social and environmental issues, and there has been progress in both areas, that is undeniable. But this coalition government owes its election in part to the ties it has established with the agribusiness sector [for example, the current Minister of Agriculture, Carlos Favaro, of the Social Democratic Party, one of the ten parties that formed a coalition around Lula in the 2022 elections, represented the interests of soybean producers before entering politics in 2014].
Regardless of the government, the large land structure inherited from our colonial past, in which 1% of the landowners hold almost 50% of the land, has not been overcome. This explains why, for example, the area of our soya fields is equivalent to the area of Germany. And, on these monoculture lands, the main commodities produced – soya, maize, cotton, sugar cane and cattle – alone account for almost 90% of pesticide use in Brazil.
Conclusion :
everything that touches the environment ends up affecting what happens to our health. And the invasion of agricultural products from countries that do not respect EU rules is now a river in flood: from Mauritanian watermelonsto Tunisian artichokes, from Albanian tomatoes to Egyptian tomatoes: the presence of foreign fruit and vegetables in our markets continues to grow…
In an increasingly multicultural and global market, alongside fresh produce from countries such as Albania and Morocco, a significant figure emerges: the import of tomato derivatives from Egypt to Europe, which grew by 88% in the last six months of 2025 according to Eurostat. In addition, more than one million hectares are beingcultivated in the Nile delta (Project New Delta) mainly for export.
Mauro Minelli, immunologist and professor of clinical nutrition at the Lum Giuseppe Degennaro University, spoke to Adnkronos Salute on the subject. Not an economist, but a doctor: a figure who speaks directly to consumers, because foreign provenance – in itself – is irrelevant to those who believe in the goodness of international trade and free trade.
“The most critical point of the issue lies in the use of chemical molecules banned by EU regulations due to their proven toxicity to humans. While Italian agriculture operates under zero tolerance or minimum precautionary limits, analyses on non-EU products often reveal residues of substances that are anything but reassuring. These include mancozeb and chlorpyrifos,’ stresses the immunologist.
Let’s take a closer look at what they are “The former (mancozeb),’ he explains, ‘is a fungicide classified as a potent endocrine disruptor. Scientific literature points to its ability to alter thyroid function and interfere with hormone metabolism. Chronic exposure, even at low dosages, is associated, by virtue of a build-up effect, with teratogenic risks. The second (chlorpyrifos), on the other hand, is an organophosphorus insecticide whose danger to neurodevelopment, especially in childhood, has led to its total ban in the EU in 2020. It acts by inhibiting acetylcholinesterase, with potential permanent damage to cognitive and behavioural functions. The import of products grown with these substances constitutes real health dumping, where savings at the till translate into a silent toxicological risk to the body’.
‘Defending the Italian supply chain does not just mean excluding the risk, but guaranteeing a benefit,’ Minelli points out. ‘The Italian tomato,’ he points out, ‘is not a simple ingredient, but a concentrate of bioactive molecules. Thanks to the selected varieties (such as San Marzano) and the optimal sun exposure of our territories, the lycopene content is at the top of the world…
Returning to Mercosur: it is obvious that the risk of ‘invasion’ of uncontrolled products, without the safeguard clauses, is likely to exacerbate the risks to our health. But the real problem is that in the European Union there are ‘derogation’ authorisations that allow prohibited substances to be used by member countries to compete unfairly with their neighbours.
This is the case of Dormex, a toxic and carcinogenic product used, for example, in the production of kiwifruit: it is the molecule that has in fact largely determined the relocation of Italian kiwi companies to Greece – because in times of climate change it saves production – and the tangible example of what fruit and vegetable entrepreneurs mean when they speak of ‘reciprocity’.
Banned in Italy on the basis of European regulations, but authorised by way of derogation in the Greek country, Dormex has just obtained a temporary authorisation from our Ministry of Health to be used only on kiwi fruit in southern Italy…
Before lashing out at Mercosur, perhaps Europe needs to put its own house in order.
