Why France’s agriculture law may not help the farmers it claims to defend

The law seeks to re-authorise use of acetamiprid and other chemicals banned in France over environmental and health concerns. Scientists and environmental groups warn these can harm bees, biodiversity and potentially human health, meaning the supposed relief could create long-term problems for rural communities.

• Critics argue the real challenge for farmers isn’t regulatory red tape but economic pressures and low incomes. Many farmers struggle because the system gives too little reward relative to what supermarkets and food corporations earn, making pesticide use seem like the easier option rather than a sustainable solution.
• The law is backed by France’s largest farming union, FNSEA, which tends to represent larger farms and agribusiness interests. Opponents say this means small and medium farmers — who want support transitioning to sustainable methods — may be left out.
• Lawmaker Laurent Duplomb, who proposed the bill, is himself a large farmer with ties to agribusiness. Critics in parliament and environmental groups argue this raises conflicts of interest and suggests the law favors industrial agricultural interests over broader farming communities.
• More than 2 million people signed a petition against the law, and France’s constitutional council struck down parts of it that violated environmental protections — showing widespread resistance from citizens, scientists and civil society.

Supporters argue the law could reduce bureaucratic hurdles and help farmers compete internationally, especially in sectors like sugar beet or hazelnuts where alternatives to pesticides are claimed to be limited. But opponents counter that alternative farming practices and support mechanisms could be a better solution.