Pests don’t wait. In citrus, as in so many other crops, new threats keep emerging, while the tools to fight them grow fewer each year. Exceptional authorizations have become the go-to solution to protect yields and keep farms running.
But it’s worth asking: are we really solving the problem, or just buying time in a system that needs to change?
Exceptional authorizations allow growers to act quickly when pests appear and no approved alternatives are available, or when existing products lose effectiveness. In practice, they often serve as a temporary fix that saves the season.
However, the steady increase in the number of such authorizations each year reveals a worrying trend: what was meant to be an occasional measure is slowly becoming a structural practice.
| Year | Exceptional Authorizations |
| 2020 |
|
| 2021 |
|
| 2022 |
|
|
2023 |
|
|
2024 |
|
|
2025 |
|
This trend of growing emergency authorizations shows the urgency facing the sector and highlights the lack of registered alternatives and new product approvals.
If exceptions become the norm, we’ve missed the point of regulation.
These authorizations provide immediate protection and help prevent serious economic losses. Yet relying on them repeatedly can have significant side effects:
They create confusion. The constant withdrawal and reauthorization of products make it difficult for growers to know what is actually allowed — and for how long.
They undermine trust in safety measures. These products were withdrawn for valid reasons, often related to health or environmental risks. Reintroducing them sends mixed messages and raises questions about long-term effects on human health, soil, and natural ecosystems.
They delay adaptation. Farmers end up waiting for administrative decisions rather than relying on a predictable, stable framework.
They discourage innovation. When emergencies are constantly solved through exceptions, there’s less pressure to develop new and sustainable alternatives.
While the withdrawal of active ingredients across Europe has left gaps in pest management, these gaps do push farmers and entrepreneurs to look for new solutions, invest in innovation, and strengthen their IPM programs. This can be seen as a positive step toward sustainability, but not one they can do alone: growers need more support and reliable alternatives to make this shift work in practice and entrepreneurs need faster routes to market via rapid authorizations for new products.
In reality, while these exceptions provide short-term relief for growers, they fall short of fostering the innovation and resilience needed for the future of citrus production. Field technicians and experts agree: it’s time to strengthen collaboration among all actors in the system.
To move toward a more resilient model, we need to:
Planning, investment, and collaboration must replace the annual “patchwork” approach. Otherwise, the sector will remain trapped in a cycle of uncertainty that weakens both its competitiveness and its sustainability.
As someone who works closely with growers every day, I’m convinced that the agriculture of the future cannot rely on exceptional decisions — it must be built on clear, long-term strategies. Every year, we wait for the administration to decide whether we’ll have access to the tools we need, and that uncertainty holds the entire sector back.
Exceptional authorizations are sometimes necessary, yes — but they cannot become the norm. If we keep acting only in response to crises, we risk standing still while others move forward.
What we truly need is planning, investment in research, and genuine collaboration between farmers, administrations, and industry. Only through shared effort can we stop patching problems and start building lasting, sustainable solutions for the future of citrus farming.