BrasilAgro, a farmland investor and producer of soybeans, corn and sugarcane, described the glyphosate situation in Brazil and the relationship between herbicides and productivity.
In 2018, a Brazilian trial court ruled that new products containing glyphosate, a herbicide widely used on soybeans and other crops, were banned from registration in Brazil and that existing registrations would be suspended until the government reevaluated their toxicity.
This decision also suspended the registration of other chemicals, such as the insecticide abamectin and the fungicide thiram.
According to the Brazilian Minister of Agriculture, this decision would be a disaster for the agricultural industry and, for that reason, the decision was subject to multiple appeals.
On September 3, 2018, an appeals court reversed the decision of the first instance court.
The use of glyphosate is currently allowed. However, BrasilAgro notes that it cannot guarantee that the chemical will continue to be allowed.
Herbicides
BrasilAgro states that banning the use of glyphosate to control weed infestation could compromise no-till farming, which is important for productivity and sustainability, and lead to increased use of other pest control products.
Currently, no alternative exists in Brazil to replace glyphosate.
According to BrasilAgro, similar products have a high cost and are not readily available to meet the demand for glyphosate.
BrasilAgro is focused on acquiring, developing and exploring agricultural properties that it believes have significant potential for cash flow generation and value appreciation.
In addition, the company seeks to transform its acquired properties through investments in infrastructure and technologies that enable the cultivation of high value-added crops (soybeans, corn, sugar cane and others) and livestock and to sell its developed properties for capital gains.
Last week, the European Commission announced that it will allow the use of glyphosate for 10 more years in the European Union, after its member nations could not agree on whether they were for or against the extension.