7 Key Takeaways for Financing the Transition

by Benjamin Warr

Pesticide-risk reduction is now a biodiversity, pollution, and financial priority. Reducing pesticide risk should be treated as a core component of national biodiversity implementation and pollution prevention, not solely as an agricultural or chemicals-management issue.

Phasing out Highly Hazardous Pesticides is a core and practical entry point. The strong alignment between GBF Target 7 and GFC Target A7 makes HHP phase-out one of the most direct and measurable ways to reduce pesticide risk and toxic load.

Transition pathways are essential to achieve durable change. While regulatory measures such as bans and restrictions are important, they are rarely sufficient on their own. Lasting reductions in harmful agrochemical use require well-designed transition pathways.

Stronger monitoring and reporting are essential. This includes national reporting to the CBD and the GFC, and measurement of pesticide risk and impact.

Finance and fiscal policy can accelerate the transition. Governments should establish clear long-term policy signals and align fiscal policies and financial instruments to support safer and more sustainable alternatives, while removing subsidies and incentives that encourage harmful pesticide use.

Show clear commitments and targets. Experience from FARM-supported countries and others, demonstrates that meaningful progress is possible when governments combine regulatory reform, farmer support, market engagement, stronger monitoring systems, and appropriate financing.

Partnerships and inclusive collaboration are essential. Governments should foster partnerships across the agrifood value chain and engage farmers, researchers, financial institutions, civil society, and the private sector, while ensuring the meaningful inclusion of women, smallholders, Indigenous Peoples, and other underrepresented groups.