Three NGOs – PAN Europe, IFOAM Organics Europe, and Global 2000 – have lodged a formal complaint before the European Ombudsman concerning the European Commission’s reliance on the Harmonised Risk Indicator 1 (HRI1) to measure use and risk of pesticides.  

Helmut Burtscher-Schaden, chemicals officer at Global2000 (Friends of the Earth Austria), said: “The current indicator does not reflect the real toxicity of pesticides. For instance, this indicator attributes over 800% more risk to potassium bicarbonate (baking powder, used in organic agriculture) than to difenoconazole, a synthetic fungicide flagged as highly toxic and persistent.” 

Eric Gall, deputy director at IFOAM Organics Europe, said: “The HRI-1 indicator leads to absurd results and gives the wrong impression that organic farming is the problem, because it is mainly a volume-based indicator that discriminates against natural substances. Relying on a misleading indicator to measure pesticide use is ineffective and unfair to organic farmers who are the ones who strive to apply agroecological methods as alternatives to toxic synthetic pesticides.” 

“The HRI-1 indicator leads to absurd results and gives the wrong impression that organic farming is the problem”

Martin Dermine, executive director at PAN Europe, said: “The European Commission regularly communicates that pesticide use is decreasing in Europe thanks to their flawed indicator. This is untrue: available pesticide sales data show that there is no substantial reduction in the use of toxic pesticides. Using this false indicator is misleading both policymakers and the general public.” 

By filing this complaint, the three organisations ask the European Ombudsman to assess whether the Commission has committed maladministration by breaching its duty of accuracy and transparency by using and promoting HRI-1. 

The NGOs are demanding that the Commission immediately “fixes the major flaw of the current methodology and corrects previous misleading announcements to restore public trust”. The always want to see the adoption of a “scientifically robust indicator that takes into account human and environmental toxicity, as well as water contamination, to provide a credible measure of pesticide reduction”.