Making sure our products are safe – for people, animals and the environment – is our top priority
Agriculture is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the world—and we support regulatory processes designed to demonstrate the safety of our products, because safety is also our top priority.
In the United States, for example, our pesticide products are governed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and follow a rigorous review process to evaluate their safety—a process called registration review—that is repeated at least every 15 years, taking into consideration any new data. For each pesticide it reviews, the U.S. EPA evaluates hundreds of different scientific studies during the registration and re-registration process, relying on the best science available and placing high value on transparency in decision-making.
During the process, the U.S. EPA may request studies and data from manufacturers, third parties and the public and takes findings and questions to independent expert panels such as the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel and the National Academy of Sciences.
The U.S. EPA assesses and evaluates the potential for:
In the European Union, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is the regulatory agency in charge of scientific advice and risk assessment for pesticides. EFSA is responsible for the peer review of the risk assessment of active substances used in plant protection products. It is also responsible for the evaluation of Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) to ensure pesticide residues in food do not pose unacceptable risks to consumers. The evaluation of formulated plant protection products is carried out at national level by the regulatory authorities of EU Member States.
To learn more about EFSA’s thorough pesticide review process, visit EFSA’s website.
So, by the time a product gets to market, it has undergone rigorous review – at times multiple decades’ worth of scientific studies – and scrutiny by multiple government agencies as well as data from manufacturers, third parties like the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel and the National Academy of Sciences and the public.
A single crop protection product takes an average of 13 years to develop, a biotech trait takes almost 16 years and a new seed product can take seven years.
The reviews, which can cost as much as $300 million each, are designed to test, and retest, and test again, what impact, if any, the active ingredients in the products have on human, animal and environmental health. The products themselves are critical because, simply put, they help farmers grow more food (and fuel), to help feed a growing world. For example, American farmers produce 300% more per acre today than they did 70 years ago, allowing hundreds of millions of acres to remain out of production.
Are these products safe? Yes, products can be safely used by following label directions. They are not safe to ingest or be used for purposes other than intended. And most are not new – 2,4-D, for example, an active ingredient in one of our most-used products, has been around for more than 80 years. More than 4,000 rigorous, peer-reviewed studies – from the 1940s all the way through today – have found that 2,4-D products are safe for human and animal health, and for the environment, when used according to the label.
We are proud of our track record.
And we've made a public commitment that every newly developed Corteva product must meet our stringent sustainability criteria, which are aligned to the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
Corteva supports industry and regulatory efforts to make safety information more readily accessible.