‘Pesticide’ is an umbrella term for any substance which is designed to control a pest or disease. Types of pesticides include herbicides (designed to kill plants), insecticides (insects), fungicides (fungi), rodenticides (rodents) and molluscicides (molluscs). The term also includes synthetic plant growth regulators (which modify plant development so they can grow out of season), defoliants (that accelerate leaf fall) and desiccants (which dry leaves out so they can be harvested).

The agricultural sector is the predominant user, applying pesticides to both grow and preserve food crops. These chemicals can create drift in the air and run-off into water sources, contaminating the natural environment for both rural residents and wildlife. Pesticides used in farming also make their way to consumers as residues on a wide range of food items, most commonly fruit, vegetables and grains such as wheat.

Pesticides are still widely available to buy in various UK supermarkets, garden centres and DIY chains for use at home. However, certain major retailers have removed these products from their shelves in an effort to protect biodiversity and human health. 

Pesticides are also used by councils and other private land managers (such as housing estates) to clear roads, pavements, playgrounds and other urban spaces of ‘weeds’. This is the focus of our campaign. 

Pesticide use in urban areas only constitutes approximately 10% of the UK’s total usage, but it is the second most common route through which people are exposed to pesticides (after diet). 

While phasing-out pesticides in agriculture can be a complicated process, making our urban spaces pesticide-free is one of the easiest ways to reduce our exposure to toxic chemicals. There are many effective non-chemical alternatives to manage plant growth in urban spaces which enable both people and wildlife to thrive. Ending urban pesticide use would have no impact on food security and could be a major boost to biodiversity in the UK, which is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world.

Pesticides (usually herbicides) are used by councils and other land managers (such as universities and schools) to clear roads, pavements, playgrounds and other urban spaces of unwanted plant growth. 

While some of the pesticides used in urban spaces are targeted at protecting infrastructure or ensuring that pavements remain accessible to residents, the vast majority are used solely for cosmetic reasons. We are risking the health of humans and wildlife just to keep places looking ‘neat and tidy’.

Unless your council has made a commitment not to use pesticides, they could be using pesticides in the following places:

• Roads and highways
• Pavements (including along walls, in gutters, between paving slabs)
• Tree pits
• Parks and public gardens
• Playgrounds
• Car parks
• Road verges
• Land around hospitals and care homes
• Grounds of nurseries, schools, colleges and universities
• Housing estates
• Land around shopping centres
• Around train tracks and train stations
• Sports pitches, playing fields, and bowling greens
• Quays along rivers, canals or the sea
• Beaches

No. From their years of experience helping various bodies to go pesticide-free, PAN UK advises councils to adopt a three-year phase out plan. 

Councils need the time to assess their local needs and create an adapted weed-management plan, setting out a road map for how they plan to move away from pesticides. PAN UK doesn’t advocate for a ‘like-for-like’ approach, where a synthetic pesticide is replaced solely by a natural substance for instance. Non-chemical alternatives tend to work differently to pesticides so there is no one ‘silver bullet’ to replace glyphosate or other similar herbicides. PAN UK recommends, rather, that over the course of a three-year phase-out period councils trial a range of different non-chemical alternatives, monitoring the process carefully to see what works. Ultimately, councils can then adopt a suite of targeted measures adapted to the needs of their particular areas. 

It is also vital that councils spend the phase-out period communicating the benefits of going pesticide-free to ensure that residents are brought with them on the journey. Local groups representing those who struggle with mobility should be consulted regularly along the way to ensure that the phase-out plan works for everyone. 

For more information, you can find PAN UK’s guide for local authorities here.

There are many effective and sustainable alternatives to herbicides available for managing weeds in the urban setting. There is no single approach that will accommodate the needs of every council so a range of solutions have been adopted by councils across the UK. 

In addition to replacing pesticides with non-chemical alternatives such as hot water, foam and brushing, many pesticide-free councils are also taking preventative measures (such as removing soil from streets in February before the growth season starts) which reduce habitats for weeds to establish in the first place. Other pesticide-free councils are allowing areas to become wilder, while communicating with local residents to accept more ‘weediness’ and using community groups and volunteers to clear areas that have to be maintained for accessibility or infrastructure reasons. Usually it is a combination of techniques that provides the greatest level of success. Just like electric cars for example, as demand grows for non-chemical alternatives the existing techniques will become more refined and new methods will come on the market. 

For more information on alternatives see PAN UK’s guide for local authorities.

Many councils have commitments to protecting and improving biodiversity in their local areas, but most of them continue to use pesticides. Pesticides are toxic chemicals designed to kill living things, and yet they are the only chemicals deliberately released into the environment. They have been linked to a wide range of negative environmental impacts since the 1960s when Rachel Carson warned the world about an impending ‘Silent Spring’ in which the sounds of nature had been extinguished by pesticides.

Due to habitat loss in the countryside, and the large quantities of pesticides used in UK agriculture, our urban spaces need to be a refuge for our beleaguered wildlife (including birds, insects, bees and hedgehogs). But the overuse of pesticides by councils is destroying many of the areas where they forage for food, and contaminating the natural resources they depend upon. 

In addition, pesticides will often run off hard surfaces such as pavements and paths, contaminating water courses and harming aquatic wildlife in the process. 

There is more information on how pesticides impact our environment here.

Pesticides do not only affect the environment but can also damage human health. 

In the urban setting, we are exposed to pesticides when spending time in spaces that have recently been treated such as parks, or even on our doorsteps once our streets have been sprayed. There is no obligation for councils to tell residents when an area is about to be (or has just been) treated so it is impossible to avoid exposure. 

Children are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of pesticides for a range of reasons, including that their ability to cope with poisoning tends to be less than that of adults. They are also more likely to spend time in public spaces that have been treated, such as parks and playgrounds. 

Pesticide applied to hard surfaces such as pavements tend to run off into water courses, posing a risk to drinking water quality, particularly in towns or cities that sit atop aquifers.  

There is also a major concern regarding the health of council and contractor staff responsible for spraying chemicals in urban spaces. This has led the trade union, GMB, to repeatedly call for glyphosate to be banned in the UK in order to protect the health of its members. 

In March 2015, the UN World Health Organisation declared glyphosate (the pesticide most widely used in UK towns and cities) to be a ‘probable carcinogen’ for humans, meaning that repeated or long-term exposure is linked to cancer. The herbicide 2,4-D is also a probable carcinogen and suspected endocrine disruptor, and MCPA is acutely toxic and a possible carcinogen. These are the three most widely used pesticides by local authorities in public spaces. 

While much of the health debate around glyphosate has focused on whether it causes cancer, independent scientists from around the world largely agree that long-term exposure to the chemical is harmful to human health in a range of ways. It is increasingly being linked to Parkinson’s and can cause conditions such as kidney and liver disease, act as an endocrine and immune system disruptor, and result in reproductive and neurological problems. A recent study found links between glyphosate exposure and reduced sperm count.

For more information on the impacts of pesticides on human health, read our briefing on pesticides and human health.

Land managers – including local councils – are not required to provide any warning, either before or after pesticide application has taken place. It is therefore impossible for pet owners to avoid treated areas and our pets may inadvertently eat, walk, play or lay down on grass or ground that has recently been sprayed with pesticides. 

Symptoms of acute pesticide poisoning (single incident exposure) in cats and dogs can include vomiting, diarrhoea, drooling, irritation to the skin or eyes, chemical burns, breathing problems, lethargy, disorientation, seizures and even death. While instances of acute pet poisoning are sometimes studied and recorded, there is almost no research on the long-term, chronic effects on pets’ health of regular, ongoing direct exposure to pesticides that have been linked to diseases in humans such as cancer. For more information please see here.

It is crucial that stopping the use of pesticides in towns and cities does not negatively impact infrastructure or accessibility. Streets must be maintained to a high standard so that disabled people and their personal assistants, elderly people, and parents or carers with buggies do not face issues using the pavements. 

As many towns and cities (and whole countries like France, Luxembourg and Denmark) have proven, it is perfectly possible to go pesticide-free without negatively impacting accessibility for local residents. We need to take a more holistic approach which prioritises accessibility while also protecting human health and the environment. 

It is vital that councils ensure that the rights and needs of those who struggle with access are considered while designing their pesticide phase-out plans. The best way to do this is to explicitly include consulting with local groups and networks that represent disabled and elderly people in public outreach initiatives and review throughout, to ensure that there isn’t plant growth in spaces that would make their already-challenging use of urban spaces harder. These groups will be best-placed to represent the voices and concerns of their members and advise on how best to go pesticide-free while maintaining accessibility.

Fifty councils in the UK are already pesticide-free, with another fifty well on their way having already made significant reductions in the amounts of chemicals they are using. This map shows which councils  in the UK have stopped or reduced their pesticide use, as well as where there are active campaigns. PAN UK also has these success stories available showcasing councils’ work. 

France, Luxembourg and Denmark have banned the use of pesticides in all towns, villages and cities. France has gone even further and banned all pesticides outside of agriculture. 

In the UK there is a growing appetite for a national ban on urban pesticides, as demonstrated by this Early Day Motion in the UK Parliament, supported by cross-party MPs.

Pesticides undergo an assessment process before they’re licenced for use. However, the pesticide approvals process has some major gaps, including the following:

• The process only looks into immediate, short-term, or lethal effects. Most assessments don’t consider long-term effects.
• There’s not enough testing being done. When it comes to testing the impact of pesticides on wildlife, current tests don’t reflect real-world field conditions and are only tested on a small range of species. Furthermore, none of the tests consider food chain effects, such as how reducing seeds or insects might affect birds and other animals.

• It is important to consider how pesticides may act when mixed together. Known as the ‘cocktail effect’, this is an area that needs more research, as evidence shows that they have really harmful results.

The government is slow to adapt to independent scientific studies which show possible harms associated with a chemical. Despite the UK’s hazard-based, precautionary approach, it remains all too often the case that scientists must bring extensive amounts of proof of harms before their warnings are considered and their recommendations are implemented. 

There have been many examples of the government ignoring independent scientific studies to deem a substance to be ‘safe’. High profile examples include asbestos and cigarettes. However, even when looking just at pesticides, there is an obvious cycle – citizens and NGOs raise alarm bells about a particular pesticide. Government and industry defends the pesticide in question until the harms can no longer be ignored at which point it is banned. 

Glyphosate came very close to being banned by the EU in 2017 and is very likely to, at some point, be consigned to the history books.

We are calling for all governments in the United Kingdom to ban pesticide use in urban spaces. 

According to the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pesticides and wider environmental policy is devolved to each administration. This means that different decisions can be taken in England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland and different policies can be followed in each country. However, in line with the Chemicals and Pesticides Provisional Common Framework (Defra 2022), the Governments of the four nations seek consistency of decision-making where this is desirable. 

When it comes to legislation on the topic of urban pesticides, the UK Government could legislate for the whole of Great Britain, but it would need formal agreement from the Scottish and Welsh Governments on whether they would want the law  to apply in their countries. The Scottish and Welsh Governments could, in theory, legislate separately for pesticides in their individual countries (though this would be a step away from all other pesticides legislation that applies to Great Britain).

Our main campaign focus is therefore the UK Government in Westminster, but we are also going to continue to campaign for the devolved nations to take action on urban pesticides.

The Pesticide Collaboration – hosted by PAN UK and the RSPB – brings together health and environmental organisations, academics, trade unions, farming networks and consumer groups, working under a shared vision to urgently reduce pesticide-related harms in the UK, for a healthy future. 

We do this through:

• Influencing UK policy
• Convening conversations to explore solutions, including collaborating with farmers to showcase what’s possible
• Supporting and amplifying each other’s pesticide-related work

Throughout all our work we aim to tackle the root systemic drivers of pesticide reliance and overuse, and advocate for the solutions required to tackle them. The Pesticide Collaboration is generously funded by The Esmée Fairbairn Foundation.