b'THE RISK CORNER BY: DAVID ZARUKSEEDS AND PESTICIDES:BREAKING UP IS HARD TO DOShould seed and pesticide companiestles fought to delegitimize herbicide-tol-break into separate entities? erant GMOs. The best regulatory defence Should chemical companies spin-off theirfor ag-tech is to show the benefits of syn-ag-tech businesses? ergies (to farmers, to the environment andShould outside influences drive businessto consumers).strategies? Why is this happening then?There has been a lot of unlove withThere isnt a strong rationale to sepa-chemicals over the last 30 years. In therate such integrated sectors, so fear must be 1990s, I experienced the first wave of com- driving the reasoning.panies liberating their more innovativeSocial media has been talking about pharmaceutical and biotech divisions fromthis being the crop protection industrys the dirty chemical businesses. Calling cardsBig Tobacco moment. Faced with unlim-soon became collector items as companiesited lawsuits threatening their existence, reorganized at a dizzying pace. A decadethe main tobacco companies relented and later, specialty chemicals were spun offsubmitted to regulators demands in the from commodity businesses as the rush tofind all agricultural technology companiesTobacco Master Settlement Agreement. cleantech and green chemistry became theseparated into two independent entities,Certain large ag-tech companies fear PR consultants new buzzwords. Now, afterone selling seeds and the other selling pes- having their entire businesses sued out of a decade of consolidation in the crop pro- ticides, what would happen? existence so by spinning off their seed busi-tection industries, are we seeing the next With smaller companies becoming smallernesses, they believe they stand a chance ofwave of break ups with the innovative seedscaled (until the next wave of consolida- surviving.industries liberating themselves from thetion), farmers will find themselves withThis is not just happening to the litigation-laden pesticide businesses? less access to specialized agronomists,ag-tech sector. I have written volumes on The rationale I hear from the insid- industry sales reps and technical support.how the La Jolla tobacconization strategy ers seems quite convincing. CompaniesThere will be less interdisciplinary exper- has been extended to attacking fossil fuels, involved in both the seed and pesticide sec- tise to support the agricultural sector at afood and drink, alcohol, plastics, chemicals tors see a pipeline of pesticide-related classtime when the challenges are mountingand even the pharmaceutical industries. The action lawsuits, MDLs and unlimited foun- given climate issues, soil degradation andWorld Health Organization is taking the dation-funded activist campaign onslaughtsmarket difficulties. At a time when farm- lead with their commercial determinants of threatening their entire business. Bringingers need more trusted allies and support,health strategy to denormalize all so-called new pesticides onto the market has becomethis strategy seems counter-intuitive. health harming industries.increasingly difficult while the regulatoryThe research community thrives onWouldnt it make more sense for these world is warming to the more innovative,cross-fertilization. My former companyindustries to come together and unite to fix highly beneficial gene-editing solutions.used to put chemists and biologists in thethe broken system controlled by a litigation And finally, from a PR perspective, sellingsame offices or on the same projects inindustry that is driving the narrative with seeds is much better received than sellingthe research centre to enhance innovationan army of NGOs, foundations and journal-chemicals that enter the food chain. Theand idea cultivation. Innovations like seedists? Entire value chains are suffering and future is in advancing seed technologiestreatments, herbicide-tolerant seeds orpaying the costs as voracious Predatort and breeding solutions. no-till farming with complex cover cropslawyers enrich themselves. This column But Im not convinced.would be less likely today if researchershas argued before that there needs to be Ten years ago, the logic was that thewere left to iterate in their silos. a integrated food chain working together two sectors were complementary, and theIn the public policy arena, global tradeon behalf of everyone: from farmers and merger of, for example, Dow and Dupontsassociations are already struggling to findresearchers to retailers and consumers. agricultural sciences businesses, achieveda voice in policy debates. In many cases,This coordinated approach would a synergy and scale that delivered a betterthe seed sector has been under-representedmake much more sense than executives slic-service to farmers, researchers and society.(remember the unceremonious exit ofing off valuable chunks of their companies Today spinoffs are back in fashion withgreen biotech from Europabio or BIO?).out of fear of the litigation industry wolves companies like GE, J&J and KelloggsInnovative seed breeding technologiesapproaching the herd. making balance-sheet decisions to pleasehave been facing unrelenting regulatory shareholders. But would such actions inpressure since GMOs entered the riskDavid Zaruk is a professor based in Brussels the ag-tech sector please the value chain? issue debate. Attacks on relatively benignwriting on environmental-health risk policy If we were to wake up tomorrow toherbicides like glyphosate were proxy bat- within the EU Bubble.34ISEED WORLD EUROPEISEEDWORLD.COM/EUROPE | NOVEMBER 2025'