|
A new analysis from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
and the Illinois Soybean Association finds that Illinois corn
and soybean farmers could lose up to $609 million per year —
representing a 3.6% revenue loss — if the state banned the
weedkiller glyphosate.
The estimate represents a realistic scenario in which farmers
would replace glyphosate with more expensive and slightly less
effective herbicide products, and accounts for modest yield
losses. But the study’s authors say any yield loss, even
equating to just 3.6% of a farmer’s bottom line, would be hard
to bear.
“I don't know of any farmer who wants to take a revenue loss by
any stretch of the imagination, and especially when we've got
such tight margins right now,” said study co-author Aaron Hager,
professor and faculty Extension specialist in the Department of
Crop Sciences, part of the College of Agricultural, Consumer and
Environmental Sciences at Illinois. “Profits have been projected
to be negative again this year for a lot of Illinois farmers,
many of which may be on the verge of not being able to survive.”
The researchers became curious about economic impacts after
glyphosate bans were introduced in past Illinois legislative
sessions. Considering increasing public attention and court
cases related to glyphosate, they recognized that another ban
could be proposed at any time. Meanwhile, multiple other
pesticide bans were proposed in Illinois earlier this year.
The researchers say their analysis methods could be applied to
other chemicals.
“We actually discussed studying several different chemicals
initially and landed on glyphosate,” said study co-author Corey
Lacey, environmental policy manager at the Illinois Soybean
Association. “We chose it because a glyphosate ban would
probably have the biggest impact on farmers since it is one of
the most used crop protection tools by corn and soybean farmers
in Illinois. So a glyphosate ban is something that we really
have to talk about and put some real numbers to.”
Estimating the loss
Lead author Sandy Dall’erba, founding director of CREATE (the
center for Climate, Regional, Environmental And Trade Economics)
and professor in the Department of Agricultural and Consumer
Economics in ACES, took a quantitative approach to the analysis.
He started by tallying the total usage and expenditures related
to glyphosate in the state. To calculate potential revenue
impacts under a ban, he relied on published estimates of corn
and soybean yield losses with decreased glyphosate use. Then he
considered alternative herbicides, measured their higher cost
and lesser efficiency, and estimated the price increase these
new options would experience in the event of a glyphosate ban.
The results indicate that Illinois corn and soybean farmers
could lose $300 to $609 million per year, representing a 1.8 to
3.6% revenue loss.
[to top of second column] |
What’s missing
The analysis paints a picture of economic hardship for Illinois
farmers, but the researchers acknowledge that it does not
represent every consequence of a hypothetical glyphosate ban.
For example, it doesn’t capture the potential human health and
environmental impacts of shelving glyphosate, nor indirect costs
related to using other crop protection tools.
“Our analysis is somewhat partial in the sense that it is only
looking at one aspect — the economic impacts on the farmer. A
complete assessment would also need to consider effects on the
agrifood supply chain, public tax revenues, human health, and
the environment before weighing the overall costs and benefits
of a glyphosate ban,” Dall’erba said.
Glyphosate is a key element in conservation tillage, used as the
burn-down herbicide to remove standing vegetation before
planting. Without it, fuel costs — and their associated
greenhouse gas emissions — would likely rise under a
hypothetical glyphosate ban.
“Glyphosate allows farmers to adopt conservation practices like
no-till on a scale that you can't accomplish in other ways,”
Lacey said. “A glyphosate ban would likely result in more
conventional tillage, which is going to have not just a
conservation cost in terms of soil health and emissions, but a
literal fuel cost since farmers would also be driving the
tractor more in the field. That would lead to increased input
costs that we didn't estimate here.”
Whatever the unaccounted impact, the researchers say it’s clear
their initial estimates are only the tip of an iceberg.
“What this work shows is that there can be significant financial
consequences for something that looks fairly simple on paper,”
Hager said.
The study, “Understanding the systemic impacts of a glyphosate
ban on Illinois agriculture: Economic, agronomic, and community
perspectives,” is published in Weed Technology [DOI:
10.1017/wet.2026.10133].
[Lauren Quinn]
|
