This newspaper reported on Wednesday that children in the Kempen region have higher levels of pesticides in their blood than the average in Europe (DS 14 September). The study was conducted by the Flemish Institute for Technological Research (Vito) and the researcher reassured in the article that there is no reason for panic, due to no acute risk. An ‘acute risk’ means that the children are dying here and now. He did point out the effects of lifelong exposure, from the long-term absorption and storage of toxins, and added that a stricter pesticide policy is an absolute must.
The Vito study cites the use of household pesticides and the proximity of agricultural fields as the main causes of the blood levels. More than half of the children studied live less than 500 metres from maize fields and grassland, and about 40 percent live less than 400 metres from a potato field. Studies show that agriculture within 3 kilometres of the home is a significant source of pesticide exposure.
Buffer of 3 (kilometres)
The poor results do not come out of nowhere. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO), Belgium uses 6,130 tonnes of pesticides annually, which corresponds to 7 kilograms of pesticides per hectare of arable land. Only the Netherlands does ‘better’, with about 9 kilograms of pesticides per hectare.
The Pesticide Directive points the way to stricter policy. The instruments are divided between the federal and regional policy levels. At the federal level, it is mainly product standards that provide for buffer zones of 1 and 3 metres around dwellings. Sometimes, specific products are provided with buffers of 5 or 10 metres.
That these buffer zones are too small is confirmed by a ruling from the French Council of State on 21 July 2021. In France, there was regulation with buffer zones of 3, 5, and 10 metres around dwellings. A study by the French Food Agency from 2019 recommends a buffer zone of at least 10 metres between dwellings and areas where carcinogenic and toxic products are used, regardless of whether the effects are proven, assumed, or suspected. Based on the report, the Council of State ruled that the existing buffer zones were inadequate and should be extended to 10 metres. Very limited compared to the 3 kilometres referred to in the Vito study.
In Flanders, the Pesticide Directive has been transposed into the Decree and Decision on Sustainable Pesticide Use. The directive and the decree provide for measures in places used by the general public or vulnerable groups. The decision prohibits the use of pesticides on grounds at childcare facilities, schools, parks, recreational and sports areas, but the home plot is not mentioned.
However, home is the place where vulnerable groups such as children and breastfeeding mothers spend most of their time. The place that should enjoy the highest protection, therefore. Moreover, the decision provides for an exception for agricultural and horticultural activities. An exception that raises eyebrows, as it is not provided for in the Pesticide Directive.
A nice target.
In an earlier opinion piece (DS 13 June) we already discussed the protection of nature and water extraction areas against pesticides. The Vito study once again shows that not only fauna and flora, but also humans need to be protected from humans. The parallel between both issues is that the tools are available, but they are not being used or are being used minimally.
How large the buffer zone around residential plots and areas used by the general public should be is a matter for discussion. The careless Flemish spatial planning comes back like a boomerang. It is precisely because of the mixing of residential and agricultural areas that Flemish children have more pesticides in their blood. This mixing also has an exponential impact on the expansion of buffer zones. A buffer zone of 3 kilometres, with our spatial planning, amounts to a pesticide-free Flanders. A nice goal, it seems to us.
A stricter pesticide policy is therefore an absolute must. The Flemish youth deserves a pesticide-free youth.