New report profiles business impacts of active ingredient withdrawals

IHS Markit Crop Science's Business impacts of ingredient withdrawals: Net impacts of withdrawals by company is the result of a study into the impacts of active ingredient withdrawals on company revenues.

Regions covered include the European Union, Brazil, India and Canada. The study carried out includes both the impacts of the withdrawals on revenues and the impacts of their possible replacements on revenues.

Chapter 1 provides a brief summary of the current context of agrochemical withdrawals, and some of the background to withdrawals based on the first ingredient to be withdrawn: DDT.

Chapter 2: Global summary

The first results-based chapter presents the results at the global level as the aggregate of all regions covered in later chapters. The results are presented as the absolute values of withdrawals by function and ingredient. Results are then presented as the net losses and gains by company based on the values of withdrawals and the possible replacements for withdrawals. The net losses and gains by company are then presented proportionally to company turnovers as a measure of the effects of the current withdrawals process on individual companies.

Chapter 3: Europe

The chapter on Europe discusses the value of withdrawals announced over the last twelve months (and therefore likely to be felt in upcoming revenue declarations), ingredients deemed as being at high risk of being withdrawn over the last twelve months and those deemed at being at high risk over the next two years.

Chapter 4: Brazil

The results for Brazil focus on the recent list announced by ANVISA. The list includes seven active ingredients: however based on available information, only the benzimidazole fungicides carbendazim and thiophanate-methyl are likely to be withdrawn within a timescale of interest. This chapter discusses the available alternatives and the resulting impacts on companies. affected.

Chapter 5: India

The Indian government recently announced unexpectedly a long list of active ingredients due to be withdrawn. This chapter discusses the active ingredients deemed as being at high risk of withdrawal in line with a recent report by Phillips McDougall, calculates the value of these withdrawals and goes on to detail likely replacements and the resulting impacts on affected companies.

Chapter 6: Canada

Canada has announced the withdrawal of several important active ingredients over the last twelve months. This chapter estimates the value of these withdrawals in line with official StatCan data and goes on to detail likely replacements and the resulting impacts on affected companies

Chapter 7: USA: Chlorpyrifos

The USA reviews active ingredients every fifteen years, and is currently in the process of reviewing several hundred before the end of 2022. There have been reports that funding to the review framework would be cut or significantly reduced meaning that the withdrawal of ingredients would be unlikely. In the absence of more information, this chapter discusses briefly the impacts on companies of chlorpyrifos which is valued at $ 300 million and was announced for withdrawal this year.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this report are entirely those of the author based on a thorough exploration of withdrawals in each authority, the resulting impacts on companies and their probable replacements.

About the Author

Charles Dean is an independent writer and data analyst within agriculture, agronomy, sustainability & natural resources. He has written several reports for Agrow and other research firms, for companies and for NGOs. Trained as a chemical engineer, he has worked in several areas within natural resources, from gas and coal to cement and agrochemicals. He currently works as an analyst for international fertilizer companies through an agronomic consultancy converting field trial results into impact assessments. He has BSc/MSc degrees from the University of Salford and a PhD/DIC from Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London.

Access free sample

This article was published by S&P Global Commodity Insights and not by S&P Global Ratings, which is a separately managed division of S&P Global.