On the night of 30 June 2026, the French Senate made one of the most controversial agricultural policy decisions of recent years. By 183 votes to 129, the chamber adopted an amendment to the agricultural emergency plan law that, under strict conditions, would allow the temporary reintroduction of two insecticides banned in France: acetamiprid and flupyradifurone. It is notable not only that the voting result was clear, but also that the government explicitly rejected the measure.
The decision illustrates the deep conflict between the economic interests of agriculture and the goals of environmental and biodiversity protection. It also shows how difficult it has become for France to reconcile its national environmental standards with competitive conditions within the European internal market.
A new attempt after the failure of the Duplomb rule
The vote is part of a debate that has been ongoing for years. In 2025, conservative senator Laurent Duplomb had already tried to legally permit the renewed use of certain neonicotinoids or comparable active substances. However, this initiative failed before the Constitutional Council, which declared the planned exemptions unconstitutional due to insufficient legal certainty.
The adopted amendment is intended precisely to correct these weaknesses. The exemptions are limited in time and may only be granted after a technical assessment by the competent health and safety authority. The legislature thus complies with the requirements previously set out by the Council of State and the Constitutional Council.
However, this does not constitute a general reauthorization of active substances. Only strictly defined exemptions would be possible.
Affected crops
The planned exemptions concern only agricultural sectors where, according to producers, there are currently no sufficiently effective alternatives against certain insect pests.
In particular, the following are mentioned:
- sugar beets,
- hazelnuts,
- cherries,
- apples.
For sugar beet cultivation, the Senate’s decision provides for a particularly extensive measure. Seed treatments would initially be authorized for one year and could then be extended twice. In addition, in exceptional cases, targeted spraying would be possible if this proved necessary from an agronomic perspective.
Arguments of supporters
Supporters of the new regulation emphasize above all the economic situation of a large number of farms. According to them, the national ban has placed France in a difficult competitive position within the European Union.
While acetamiprid and flupyradifurone remain authorised in many EU Member States, French producers must resort to less effective alternatives or suffer significant yield losses. Professional organisations report substantial damage caused by aphids and other pests in beet crops, as well as in orchards and nut cultivation.
Added to this is a competitive disadvantage compared with imported products. Fruit or sugar from other European countries can be produced using the same active substances whose use has so far been prohibited for French farmers. Critics of the situation speak of a distortion of competition within the European single market.
According to supporters, this is therefore not so much a general relaxation of environmental law as the preservation of entire production sectors and thousands of jobs in rural areas.
Environmental organisations and scientists issue warnings
On the other hand, the Senate’s decision has sparked sharp criticism. Left-wing parties, environmental organisations and many scientists see it as a clear setback for French environmental policy.
Acetamiprid belongs to the group of neonicotinoids, while flupyradifurone is chemically related to a similar class of active substances and acts on the same receptors in the nervous system of insects. Both substances are highly effective against pests, but they have been the focus of scientific research for years because of their possible effects on pollinators and other insects.
Numerous studies indicate that low concentrations can affect the orientation, reproduction, and survival of domestic and wild bees. Effects on other insect species and possible indirect consequences for entire ecosystems are also being discussed.
Although, according to the current state of scientific knowledge, acetamiprid is considered less toxic to bees than certain neonicotinoids that are now completely banned, such as imidacloprid or clothianidin, environmental researchers emphasize that this does not mean it is harmless. Intensive research is instead continuing into long-term effects, combined effects with other plant protection products, and impacts on biodiversity.
The government remains skeptical
The French government’s opposing position is notable. It opposed the inclusion of exemptions in the agricultural law in the Senate.
The reservations are not solely substantive in nature. From the government’s perspective, the controversial issue of pesticides risks overshadowing the law’s main objective. The emergency law contains numerous measures aimed at strengthening agricultural competitiveness and must be adopted quickly. A lengthy debate on plant protection products could delay or even jeopardize the entire legislative process.
The parliamentary process is not yet complete
The Senate vote does not by any means mean that the reintroduction of the two substances has been definitively decided. The law is still under parliamentary review and can still be amended or have certain provisions removed. Given the political sensitivity, a renewed legal review also seems likely.
The debate on acetamiprid and flupyradifurone illustrates a fundamental dilemma of European agriculture. On the one hand, political pressure to effectively protect biodiversity and the environment is increasing. On the other hand, farmers face increasingly global competition, in which different national authorization rules can have significant economic consequences. How France resolves this conflict of objectives will likely have repercussions on European agricultural policy far beyond the present legislative initiative.
Author: P. Tiko