But if they are illegal to use in Europe for being \u201ctoo toxic\u201d for human health or the environment, how can they still be good enough to send to Africa?<\/p>\n\n According to documents obtained under freedom of information laws, these banned pesticides are being sent to countries like South Africa, Kenya, Ivory Coast, Sudan, Morocco, and Tunisia \u2013 coming from several European countries, the top 5 being Germany, Spain, Italy, Belgium, and the Netherlands. <\/p>\n\n First on the list of pesticides banned in Europe but still exported to Africa is cyanamide, which was banned in the EU nearly 20 years ago<\/a> for showing \u201cclear indications\u201d of being harmful to the health of farm workers.<\/p>\n\n A list of fungicides illegal in the EU are also being shipped to Africa. One of them is Chlorothalonil, which was banned in the EU in 2019<\/a> and required to be phased out in all EU member states by 2020, for being a groundwater contaminant<\/a> and a \u201cpresumed human carcinogen.\u201d Others like Epoxiconazole and Mancozeb, banned in 2020<\/a> and 2021<\/a> respectively after being classified as harmful to fertility and babies in the womb, are still being dumped on Africa\u2019s doorstep. <\/p>\n\n Also notified for export by EU companies is a particularly toxic bee-killing neonicotinoid called \u201cThiamethoxam,\u201d which was banned from all outdoor use in the EU in 2018<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n Far more disturbing is that the \u201csoil fumigant\u201d 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D), a pesticide that\u2019s been banned since 2007<\/a> due to concerns about groundwater contamination and risks to wildlife, was the EU\u2019s biggest banned pesticide export to Africa, by weight in 2018. For emphasis, EU-based companies notified export of around 3,600 tonnes of this pesticide to Africa, with South Africa, Kenya, and Morocco as the main destinations.<\/p>\n\n Last year, Morocco, South Africa, Egypt, Tunisia, and Kenya were among the 25 African countries to which the EU notified exports of banned pesticides. <\/p>\n\n Two words – \u201cExport Notifications\u201d. For context, companies can\u2019t usually ship banned pesticides out of the EU without the \u201cprior informed consent\u201d of the importing country\u2019s government. This means that our governments are complicit because they are signing this off. <\/p>\n\n Whether through weak regulation, outdated laws, or sheer political pressure, many governments across the continent continue to approve chemicals that have been banned elsewhere for being too dangerous. Some don\u2019t have the capacity to thoroughly assess the risks. Others may be swayed by powerful agrochemical lobbies, trade deals, or the promise of short-term agricultural gains. <\/p>\n\n The answer is layered, painful, and rooted in survival and systemic failures. At the most basic level, there is a lack of awareness and information. Labels are often written in languages they can not read or filled with scientific jargon\/ instructions that makes them impossible to interpret. <\/p>\n\n In Tanzania<\/a>, more than half of surveyed farmers admitted to storing pesticides in their homes or reusing containers unsafely – pointing to deep gaps in extension and safety support – as well as weak regulations that still allow banned products on shelves. <\/p>\n\n On top of this, there is the crushing reality of economic dependence. For smallholder farmers living harvest to harvest, pesticides are marketed as lifelines; cheap, accessible, and offering quick fixes. <\/p>\n\n Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa<\/a> shows many farmers spray pesticides prophylactically, because they view chemicals as a form of \u201cinsurance\u201d. This dependence is deepened by agricultural systems shaped by the Green Revolution model, and credit or subsidy programs from governments and donors, which pair hybrid seeds with fertilizers and pesticides. <\/p>\n\n The problem is also linked to climate change and resilience. Aggressive marketing by agrochemical companies frames pesticides as modern and essential for productivity in the face of the current climate crisis. Rising temperatures and erratic rainfall are increasing pest outbreaks, making farmers even more reliant on fast, chemical fixes to protect their crops. With the promise of short-term gains, HHPs have created the perception that they are essential for food production. <\/p>\n\n And while farmers carry the burden of exposure in the fields, consumers carry it on their plates,<\/a> eating food every day without knowing that it has been grown with substances considered too toxic for Europe – while leaving behind a trail of human-health risks like cancer, biodiversity loss, degraded soils and polluted waters<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n Across Africa, farmers and researchers are already experimenting with safer, more sustainable methods. Case studies from Kenya<\/a> show that viable options are working on the ground, though barriers of training, market access, and government support still remain. There is no single silver bullet, but integrated approaches blending traditional knowledge with modern science are proving effective.<\/p>\n\n Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is increasingly recognized as a system that reduces reliance on pesticides by combining safer, cheaper, and more sustainable methods<\/a>. The first part of the system is regular monitoring, where farmers check their crops to see which pests are present and whether they\u2019ve reached harmful levels. <\/p>\n\n Secondly, prevention is emphasized through good practices such as crop rotation, intercropping, and building healthy soils that make plants stronger and less attractive to pests. Additionally, the system relies on biological allies like ladybirds, birds, or fungi that naturally attack pests and help nature do the work. In Kenya, the wasp Acerophagus papayae<\/em> has helped tackle the papaya mealybug. <\/p>\n\n Lastly, only when absolutely necessary, pesticides are applied carefully and minimally, choosing the right product, in the right amount, at the right time.<\/p>\n\n Biopesticides offer another path by working with nature instead of against it. Biopesticides made from plants, microbes, or minerals, are also gaining ground \u2013 neem sprays in Ghana are reducing reliance on synthetic chemicals. These methods<\/a> leave little or no harmful residue, protect pollinators, and are vital for export crops that must meet strict residue limits. <\/p>\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/static\/planet4-africa-stateless\/2025\/10\/6e43eec9-image-1024x686.png\")
Banned in Europe, exported to Africa<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/static\/planet4-africa-stateless\/2025\/10\/aa0abf89-image-1024x687.png\")
The loopholes that keep toxic chemicals flowing<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/static\/planet4-africa-stateless\/2025\/10\/8f406b7b-image-819x1024.jpeg\")
The question we can\u2019t ignore: why do African farmers keep spraying the \u201cpoison\u201d?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n
Alternatives to pesticides. What are the solutions?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/static\/planet4-africa-stateless\/2025\/10\/c7faaa36-image-1024x682.jpeg\")