Sylvie Goulard, ex-MEP, states Duplomb's law is a threefold economic, scientific and European drifting
In the heart of France, a legislative measure known as the Duplomb Law has sparked a significant debate about the future of agriculture, environmental protection, and sustainability. The law, which proposed reauthorizing certain banned pesticides and loosening farming regulations, has been met with strong opposition from various sectors due to its potential harmful effects on pollinators, biodiversity, and public health.
The Duplomb Law, initially intended to support agriculture, has been criticized for encouraging an economic model that prioritizes narrow interests over the general good. This approach, which some argue was put on hold during the Covid-19 pandemic, has been linked to the overexploitation of the planet, a risky path that could lead to our own ruin.
The law, however, is not without its supporters. Farming groups and the government have advocated for the law, citing the need for regulatory relief and effective pesticides to maintain competitiveness. Yet, the controversy highlights a significant divide between these economic interests and broader public health and environmental concerns.
The controversy surrounding the Duplomb Law also underscores a divide between scientific consensus and political decision-making. Scientific data points to the harmful effects of the pesticides on pollinators, biodiversity, and human health. Opponents of the law argue that the decision ignores or downplays these findings in favour of short-term economic or political gains.
The Duplomb Law case also touches on broader European commitments to environmental sustainability, biodiversity protection, and the precautionary principle—key elements in EU environmental regulations and policy frameworks. France’s Constitutional Council decision aligns with the wider EU agenda emphasizing sustainable agriculture and banning harmful practices incompatible with long-term environmental health.
In August 2025, the French Constitutional Council partially blocked the Duplomb Law by striking down its key provision that would have reauthorized the banned pesticides. The Council ruled that this provision violated France’s constitutional right to a healthy environment, emphasizing the pesticides’ negative impact on biodiversity, water, soil quality, and human health. This decision reaffirmed that environmental protection is a constitutional value in France and underscored the necessity of safeguarding public health over economic or political interests in agriculture.
Looking ahead, the Duplomb Law episode serves as a reminder of the complex interplay of economic pressures, scientific evidence, and constitutional and European environmental commitments in shaping sustainable farming practices and environmental protection policy. Ancient practices like hedge planting and respect for pollinators, as well as the use of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence for irrigation, are potential solutions for sustainable economic practices. Pragmatism is needed to ensure that these solutions are implemented effectively and equitably.
The Duplomb Law saga also underscores the importance of transparency in decision-making processes. The law was voted behind closed doors by a parity committee, a move that has been criticized for undermining public trust and engagement in democratic processes.
Moreover, the Duplomb Law episode underscores the interconnectedness of various sectors, including agriculture, the economy, and the environment. Forgetting that we are part of nature that feeds us, resources us, regulates the climate, and prevents erosion can lead to our ruin. As Frank Elderson, a member of the European Central Bank's board, aptly stated, "Destroying nature is destroying the economy."
References: 1. Le Monde 2. Greenpeace France 3. EDF 4. Le Figaro 5. La Tribune
- The Duplomb Law's controversy indicates a tension between banking (economic interest) and environmental-science (scientific findings) in policymaking, as the latter suggests detrimental effects on the environment, biodiversity, and public health.
- The intersection of science (harmful impacts on pollinators, biodiversity, and human health) and politics (economic interests and political gains) is highlighted in the Duplomb Law debate, with supporters favoring the law's proposed regulatory relief and effective pesticides.
- The general-news about the Duplomb Law impacts not only France's agricultural practices but also aligns with the European Union's commitments to sustainability, biodiversity protection, and the precautionary principle in policy-and-legislation, emphasizing the importance of environmental concerns over economic interests.
