Ban on agrochemicals sparks fears for farming future

A proposed government ban on 12 widely used agrochemicals has triggered alarm across Pakistan’s agriculture sector as experts warn it can cripple crop yields, inflate costs for farmers and destabilise food security.

The proposal, discussed during a recent meeting of the Agricultural Pesticides Technical Advisory Committee, bypassed stakeholder consultations and statutory procedures, raising concerns about its scientific basis and long-term consequences. Industry leaders argue the move ignores global standards for regulating pesticides. CropLife Pakistan Executive Director Muhammad Rasheed stressed that the ban targeted active ingredients without addressing the root issue, misuse by farmers and poor handling during storage.

“This is like banning life-saving medicines because some patients take overdose; the problem is not the pesticides themselves but how they are applied. We need better enforcement and education, not elimination,” Rasheed said while talking to a group of journalists on Wednesday.

The 12 active ingredients under threat are vital for controlling pests in major crops like rice, wheat, cotton, fruits and vegetables. Removing them, experts warn, could slash yields, drive up production costs and leave farmers vulnerable to pest outbreaks. With limited alternatives available, abrupt bans risk accelerating pest resistance, making future control even harder.

Rasheed highlighted that 50% of pesticide residue issues in exports stemmed from mishandling at storage facilities, not during field use. “Training workers and improving grain storage practices could resolve half of the problem overnight,” he said. The economic ripple effects could be severe. A sudden supply gap may disrupt planting cycles, threaten rural livelihoods and deter investment in agriculture. Multinational companies have poured millions into Pakistan’s agrochemical sector, but the proposed ban risks eroding trust. “Investors won’t commit to a market where policies shift overnight,” Rasheed cautioned.

The controversy deepens as the ban clashes with the prime minister’s repeated pledges to prioritise agriculture as a pillar of economic growth. During a recent meeting, the secretary of food security admitted that the PM Office pushed for the ban after traces of pesticide residue led to export rejections, particularly in rice shipments to Europe and China.

While industry players agree on the need to meet international safety standards, they criticise the government’s approach as shortsighted. “A blanket ban is a sledgehammer where we need precision,” Rasheed said. He argued that authorities had failed to enforce proper pesticide use, opting instead for an “easy fix” that could backfire.

Instead of outlawing critical tools, CropLife Pakistan urges a science-based strategy. Proposals include training farmers on correct pesticide use, launching residue monitoring systems and offering financial incentives for compliant rice producers. Collaborating with groups like the Rice Exporters Association of Pakistan (REAP) to promote cluster farming, where small farmers adopt unified practices, could also improve sustainability. “Banning these chemicals won’t solve residue issues; it will deprive farmers of essential protection,” Rasheed warned. He emphasised that agrochemicals, when used responsibly, protected crops and incomes. Without them, Pakistan’s food security and export ambitions could falter.

While pesticide misuse must be addressed, stakeholders stress that dialogue and innovation, not reactionary bans, are the key.

“We are ready to work with the government on solutions that protect both exports and our farmers,” Rasheed said, adding “but we need policies grounded in science, not panic, with millions of livelihoods and the nation’s food supply at stake. The path forward will shape Pakistan’s farming landscape for the years to come.”