Looking back on the development of China’s pesticide industry, we reflect on the sector’s future direction.

Reviewing the development of China’s pesticide industry and contemplating its future direction Since the founding of New China, the Chinese pesticide industry has undergone four distinct phases. 1.1 The First Phase: Pesticide Shortage under a Planned Economy (1949–1978) During this period, the pesticide industry began under challenging conditions, operating within a centrally planned economic framework characterized by focused research efforts and unified supply mechanisms. 1.2 The Second Phase: Rapid Expansion of Production Capacity in the Early Market Economy (1978–1997) In this era, the industry experienced rapid growth, with numerous grassroots entrepreneurs emerging. A large number of efficient and suitable pesticide varieties were introduced through imitation and replication, while pesticide management gradually transitioned toward a more legal and institutionalized framework. 1.3 The Third Phase: Industry Expansion, Adjustment, and Upgrading (From the promulgation of the first “Pesticide Management Regulations” in 1997 to the enactment of the new regulations in 2017) During this time, legal and regulatory frameworks for pesticide management were further strengthened, international integration accelerated, awareness of pesticide safety improved, and high‑efficiency, low‑toxicity, and low‑residue pesticide varieties proliferated. 1.4 The Fourth Phase: Entering a New Era of Innovation and High‑Quality Development (June 2017 to the present) In this phase, legal and regulatory oversight of the pesticide sector deepened, ushering in a new era of full lifecycle management. Industry consolidation gained momentum, and a clear orientation toward innovation and high‑quality development became evident. Reflecting on the evolution of the pesticide industry, it is clear that its trajectory has closely mirrored China’s broader economic development. Through hard work and pioneering spirit, the industry has grown from scratch to become a major global player, achieving remarkable milestones over the past seven decades. These include: - Transforming from a weak to a strong industry, catching up with and eventually surpassing others, becoming the world’s largest producer and exporter of pesticides by 2005; - Achieving breakthroughs in scientific and technological innovation, shifting China’s pesticide production from primarily imitative to independently developed and innovative; - Making significant progress in international cooperation and exchange, thereby enhancing China’s global influence in the field; - Cultivating a cohort of enterprising entrepreneurs who are adept at business management and possess an international strategic vision, leading to the emergence of sizable pesticide enterprises with distinctive capabilities and cultures—cornerstones supporting the industry’s sustained growth; - Establishing a comprehensive system of laws, regulations, and oversight mechanisms, expanding the workforce dedicated to pesticide management, and continuously improving institutional structures. Looking back, we can discern several key trends in the industry’s development: - The pesticide sector is highly aligned with the overall socio-economic landscape of the nation—when the economy thrives, so does the pesticide industry. - The industry resonates closely with agricultural modernization; agricultural progress drives and shapes the development of pesticides, which in turn serve agriculture’s needs. - Challenges and opportunities coexist—difficulties often give rise to new possibilities. Despite setbacks and hardships, the industry has consistently demonstrated resilience, finding renewed vitality even after seemingly dead ends. - Times shape heroes, and heroes, in turn, shape the times. The reform and opening-up policies nurtured the achievements of earlier generations of pesticide entrepreneurs, while newer leaders are poised to create further successes. Emerging Changes in the New Phase of the Pesticide Industry Analyzing these changes across several dimensions—national policy, consumer preferences, market competition, and internal industry dynamics—we find: 2.1 Green Development Principles Take Root The principle of balancing environmental protection with economic growth has gained prominence. Prioritizing ecological sustainability over short-term gains has become paramount. Since the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, green development and environmental protection have been elevated to unprecedented levels. At the national level, stringent environmental policies have been enforced alongside stricter requirements for pesticide registration, review, and licensing. For businesses, this means addressing both historical environmental liabilities and preparing for future compliance, all while navigating increasingly demanding administrative thresholds. 2.2 Dramatic Shifts in Consumer Preferences As land holdings expand and new types of agricultural operators emerge, application equipment and methods have evolved significantly. Longer tenure rights and growing demand for branded, high‑quality agricultural products have increased the need for low‑toxicity, highly effective, and environmentally friendly pesticides. These shifts necessitate rethinking the industry’s development path in response to evolving agricultural practices and organizational forms. 2.3 Growing Uncertainty in International Expansion Factors such as rising domestic environmental standards, industrial development in certain developing countries, and Sino‑U.S. trade tensions—all compounded by an increasingly complex international environment—have created unprecedented challenges for the pesticide industry’s global outreach. 2.4 Increasing Fragmentation Among Pesticide Enterprises Under pressure from economic downturns, environmental cleanups, and safety regulations, the entire industry faces mounting difficulties. In this competitive landscape, the “winner‑takes‑all” dynamic, coupled with protective barriers like proprietary intellectual property and quality standards, along with survival strategies based on unique strengths, is beginning to take effect. 2.5 Major Adjustments in Industry Governance Marked by the introduction of the new “Pesticide Management Regulations,” governance has shifted from a fragmented, multi‑agency approach to a single, unified authority under the Ministry of Agriculture. At the conceptual level, the principles of “delegation, regulation, and service” have been implemented, emphasizing law‑based administration. Regulatory agencies now operate strictly within the bounds of the law, while regulated entities enjoy freedom unless explicitly prohibited. Enhanced market supervision includes accountability mechanisms that deter negligence among relevant departments and personnel, as well as institutional reforms aimed at strengthening agricultural enforcement capacities at city and county levels. Additionally, regulatory tools continue to evolve—for instance, ongoing efforts to digitize pesticide oversight, leveraging product traceability to enable real-time monitoring across systems, processes, and components, thus enabling early detection of potential issues and identifying bottlenecks in the industry’s transformation. 2.6 Streamlined Registration and Review Processes To address homogenization, the authorities aim to reduce the number of identical registrations by 30% by 2020. Simultaneously, they support the registration of high‑efficiency, low‑toxicity, and low‑residue pesticides, as well as those intended for minor crops and biopesticides, facilitating their smooth entry into the market. Furthermore, a robust mechanism for phasing out older pesticides has been established, prioritizing periodic evaluations of registered products over 15 years old, with particular attention paid to ten high‑risk substances identified through usage monitoring. Timely regulatory measures will be taken against any pesticides found to pose significant risks. Finally, a plan to replace highly toxic pesticides is being expedited, with the remaining ten or so such products slated for gradual elimination according to the principle of “ban one as another matures.” Rational Reflections on the Pesticide Industry In recent years, the pesticide industry has undoubtedly faced multiple challenges. However, food security and agricultural development remain essential priorities. As General Secretary Xi Jinping has repeatedly emphasized, China must ensure that its people’s bowls are filled primarily with domestically produced grain, which requires the indispensable role of pesticides. From this perspective, the pesticide industry is far from being a sunset sector—it is, rather, a perennially vital one. Overall, maintaining a positive and optimistic outlook on its future remains crucial. 3.1 Limited Market Size Is the Primary Source of Industry Difficulties All markets are inherently limited, and overcapacity represents a fundamental contradiction of capitalist societies. Throughout human history, the struggle for market share has been central to capital accumulation. Environmental initiatives like the “green storm” merely act as catalysts; they simply bring forward the industry’s existing structural challenges. Ultimately, market forces remain the decisive factor shaping the industry’s trajectory. 3.2 Persistent Gaps in the Pesticide Market Since the turn of the century, profound transformations have reshaped agriculture, rural areas, and farmers. On the agricultural front, demands for higher‑quality produce have risen, the acreage devoted to minor crops has expanded, new machinery and agronomic techniques have been adopted, and primary, secondary, and tertiary industries have become increasingly interconnected. Meanwhile, novel farming entities such as family farms, cooperatives, and agribusinesses have flourished, raising expectations for specialized agricultural service providers. With rural youth increasingly scarce and user needs constantly evolving, these changes present both opportunities and market gaps—calling for new pesticide products to meet emerging demands. 3.3 Room for Growth in International Markets The pesticide industry relies on a vertically integrated supply chain, making it inherently resistant to external entry. For smaller nations or even some larger ones, establishing a complete operational system can be particularly challenging. Moreover, China currently holds the presidency of the Codex Alimentarius Commission on Pesticide Residues and actively participates in international organizations such as FAO/WHO and OECD, giving it considerable influence in setting global standards. Leveraging these platforms, China can expand its export markets and strengthen cooperative ties with partner countries. 3.4 Mergers and Restructuring Are Becoming Inevitable Many pesticide companies remain small, fragmented, and poorly managed, lacking the capacity to adapt to market dynamics or align with managerial objectives. The 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China underscored the importance of allowing the market to play a decisive role in resource allocation while enhancing government functions. Today, the invisible hand of the market is already quietly exerting its influence, while the visible hand of government continues to intervene through measures such as encouraging enterprise relocation to industrial parks, raising entry barriers, mandating environmental upgrades, and implementing various industry‑specific policies. Consequently, mergers and consolidations aimed at scaling up and strengthening enterprises have become an inevitable trend. 3.5 Some Pesticide Companies Will Transition into Agricultural Service Providers—or Even Directly Engage in Farming Developing agricultural services holds special significance for advancing modern agriculture. In 2017, the Ministry of Agriculture, the National Development and Reform Commission, and the Ministry of Finance jointly issued the “Guiding Opinions on Accelerating the Development of Agricultural Production Services,” calling for vigorous promotion of this sector. In 2019, the Central Office and the General Office of the State Council further released the “Opinions on Promoting Organic Linkages Between Smallholder Farmers and Modern Agriculture.” Drawing on international best practices, China’s agricultural service sector offers substantial room for growth. Given pesticide companies’ familiarity with agriculture and farmers, transitioning into agricultural service providers presents a natural advantage. (Excerpted from “Pesticide Science and Management,” 2019, Vol. 40, No. 8, pp. 1–6.)

Hunan Haohua was awarded the 2021 May Day Labor Vanguard Medal of You County.

Hunan Haohua was awarded the 2021 May Day Labor Vanguard Medal of You County.

Fifty products registered and launched in the global pesticide market during the first quarter.

The latest quarterly report from AgbioInvestor, a UK-based agrochemical market intelligence service, has been released, summarizing the launch and registration of key global products in the first quarter of 2021. Details are provided in Table 1. Table 1 covers 50 products, including 25 herbicides, 8 insecticides, 15 fungicides, 1 insecticide-fungicide combination, and 1 plant growth regulator. These products feature active ingredients such as trifluralin, flupyrsulfuron-methyl-sodium, bromoxynil, cypermethrin, tetrazypyrimidyl, cyproconazole, and fluopyram, among others. Product Type Relevant Information on Registered or Launched Products Herbicides (25) Herbicides BASF’s Voraxor (trifluralin) received approval in Canada. Herbicides Adama’s post-emergence herbicide FirstAct (quizalofop-p‑ethyl) was approved in the United States; this product is part of the Double Team sorghum planting solution co-developed with S&W Seed. Herbicides Syngenta’s Acuron GT (flupyrsulfuron-methyl-sodium + glyphosate + mesotrione + pendimethalin) obtained registration in the U.S. for use on glyphosate-tolerant corn. Herbicides United Phosphorus’ Akito (dicamba + difenoconazole + clopyralid) was approved in Canada for use on cereal crops. Herbicides United Phosphorus’ Imiflex (metsulfuron-methyl) received approval in the U.S.; it serves as a companion herbicide to their herbicide-tolerant sorghum technology. Herbicides Adama launched the combined herbicide Emphasis (mesotrione + bromoxynil) in Canada. Herbicides SePRO plans to introduce Brake On! (fluazifop‑p‑butyl), a pre-emergence long-residual herbicide, in the U.S. Herbicides Avgust’s Camelot (pendimethalin + terbuthylazine) gained label expansion in Russia for use on soybeans and lupins. Herbicides Avgust’s Lastik Extra (fenoxaprop‑p‑ethyl) received label expansion in Russia for winter barley. Herbicides Corteva introduced Exhilirate (florasulam + difenoconazole) for cereal crops in Canada. Herbicides Corteva launched Enlist 1 (2,4-D) for Enlist E3 soybeans and Enlist corn in Canada. Herbicides Nufarm’s Sentry (metsulfuron-methyl + chlorsulfuron) was registered in Australia for use against imidazolinone-resistant oat weeds. Herbicides BASF introduced Onecide P EC (pyroxasulfone) for soybeans in Japan. Herbicides Syngenta’s Acuron (flupyrsulfuron-methyl-sodium + pendimethalin + mesotrione + atrazine) received label expansion in Canada for giant ragweed control. Herbicides Corteva’s Prominex was registered in Canada (florasulam + dicamba + clopyralid). Herbicides Syngenta launched Elijan EW (propanil) for annual broadleaf weeds in rice paddies in Japan. Herbicides BASF introduced Basta AL (glufosinate-ammonium), a household-use herbicide, in Japan. Herbicides Syngenta launched Apilogrow MX Air Granules (pyrimisulfuron-methyl + cycloxydim + propanil + mesotrione) in Japan. Herbicides ISK introduced One Hope Ace OD (nicosulfuron + tolpyralate) for corn fields in Hokkaido, Japan. Herbicides Amvac’s Impact (benzobicycloheptadiene) received label expansion in the U.S. Herbicides Bayer launched Huskie FX (sulfonylurea + bromoxynil + clopyralid) for cereal crops in the U.S. Herbicides Nufarm introduced Scorch EXT (dicamba + 2,4-D + pyridine-2-carboxylic acid) for non-crop applications in the U.S. Herbicides Avgust’s Fulltime (mesotrione + nicosulfuron + atrazine) was registered in Russia for corn. Herbicides Avgust’s Nordstream (atrazine + benzoic acid + difenoconazole) was registered in Russia. Herbicides Corteva’s Rezuvant (florasulam + triazolopyrimidine + clopyralid) was approved in the U.S. for wheat and barley. Insecticides (8) Insecticides BASF’s Glico (bromoxynil) received approval in Canada for use on cabbage. Insecticides Mitsui Chemicals launched Brofreya SC (bromoxynil) in Japan. Insecticides BASF’s Teraxxa, a seed treatment for cereals, was registered in the U.S. Insecticides The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved Temik (aldicarb) for use against Asian citrus psyllids. Insecticides MBI’s biological insecticide Grandevo WDG (Chromobacterium substagae PRAA4-1T) was approved in New Zealand and Chile, marketed respectively by Nufarm and Anasac. Insecticides AgBiTech introduced Cartugen, a baculovirus-based bio-insecticide targeting multiple pests, especially autumn leafrollers, in Brazil. Insecticides Summit Agro registered two insecticides containing cyclopyrimidine—Harvanta and Verdepryn—in California. Insecticides Avgust’s Senpai (cypermethrin) received label expansion in Russia for use on corn, sunflowers, soybeans, and grapes. Fungicides (15) Fungicides Syngenta’s Vayantis, a corn seed treatment containing tetrazypyrimidyl, was approved in the U.S. Fungicides Syngenta’s Amistar Max received emergency authorization in Germany for controlling Ramularia collo-cygni leaf spot disease on barley. Fungicides Syngenta launched two soybean fungicides in Brazil: Mitron (benzovindiflupyr + propiconazole) and Alade (benzovindiflupyr + difenoconazole). Fungicides BASF’s Cevya (chlorothalonil) received label expansion in the U.S., covering berries, melons, fruits, and root vegetables. Fungicides Syngenta expanded the Miravis product line in Canada, introducing Miravis Bold (fluopyram), Miravis Duo (fluopyram + difenoconazole), and Miravis Prime (fluopyram + fluxapyroxad). Fungicides Runfeng launched Picpro (difenconazole + propiconazole) and Mixx (oxycarboxin + cyproconazole + chlorothalonil) for soybeans in Paraguay. Fungicides United Phosphorus’ Rancona Trio (fungicide + metalaxyl + mancozeb) was approved in Canada for legume crops. Fungicides Adama’s Mastercop (copper sulfate pentahydrate) received label expansion for seasonal apple fire blight prevention. Fungicides BASF’s Serifel, a bio-fungicide based on Bacillus subtilis MBI600 strain, received label expansion in Canada, now applicable to apples, leafy greens, root vegetables, and melons. Fungicides Auspec plans to launch MiCrop (pyraclostrobin + propiconazole) for corn, soybeans, cereals, and rice. Fungicides Avgust’s Claymore (fluxapyroxad) was registered in Russia for apples and grapes. Fungicides STK Bio-ag’s Timorex Act (Melaleuca alternifolia) was registered in Mexico. Fungicides Mitsui Chemicals launched Monceren FL (penconazole) in Japan to combat rice blast disease. Fungicides Sekom Agro introduced Karma (metalaxyl) for lawns in the U.S. Fungicides Longlight launched Kypros (copper) in Brazil. Insecticide-Fungicide Combination (1) Insecticide-fungicide combination United Phosphorus’ Tepera Plus HD (bifenthrin + fluopyram) was registered and approved in the U.S. Plant Growth Regulator (1) Plant Growth Regulator Sumitomo Chemical launched Fysium (1-methylcyclopropene) in Brazil for post-harvest apple treatment.

State Council Order: All unnecessary environmental enforcement activities are hereby abolished; inspections will be limited to no more than twice per year; and penalties may be waived or reduced in 33 specified circumstances.

Case Review Recently, during an on-site inspection, enforcement officers from the Rencheng Branch of the Jining Municipal Ecology and Environment Bureau discovered that a steel pipe company in Jining was conducting steel pipe repair welding without using any fume collection and treatment equipment. Under previous regulations, such behavior would have required the company to immediately rectify the issue and pay a fine ranging from 20,000 to 200,000 yuan. However, after promptly addressing the problem, the company did not receive a penalty. Guo Pengcheng, head of the Policy and Regulations Section at the Rencheng Branch of the Jining Municipal Ecology and Environment Bureau, explained: “The company’s violation met the criteria outlined in Shandong Province’s ‘List of Minor Violations Exempt from Administrative Penalties and General Violations Subject to Reduced Administrative Penalties,’ which took effect on June 1, 2020. Following deliberation, we decided not to impose an administrative penalty.” In the past, some minor, unintentional violations by businesses—especially those not aimed at profit or harming others—would often result in penalties. Such measures imposed financial burdens on fledgling enterprises and negatively impacted their credit ratings. To address this, Shandong has refined its exemption list mechanism, clearly specifying 267 types of violations that will not incur penalties. Han Yi, chief legal counsel at the Foreign Affairs Office of the Shandong Provincial People’s Government, stated: “Our exemption list does not mean ignoring violations; rather, it shifts away from the previous practice of punishing instead of managing. This represents an important step toward service-oriented law enforcement, moving away from the old model where even minor infractions could lead to severe consequences for businesses.” When dealing with environmental issues, regulatory authorities sometimes fail to raise concerns or encounter disagreements. Regardless of whether these situations constitute violations, they often resort to shutting down operations. Over the past two to three years, such “one-size-fits-all” approaches have been common in local environmental inspections. On January 14, at a policy briefing held by the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Yan Jingjun, deputy director of the Department of Ecological and Environmental Enforcement, candidly noted that, according to records from the ministry’s inspection system, certain southern enterprises were inspected more than 30 times within six months—from May to December last year (2020). In northern regions, such as the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei area and surrounding regions, key industries involved in particulate matter emissions faced over 40 inspections throughout 2020. Yet, most of these companies showed no actual violations. At the same briefing, the ministry emphasized that the “one-size-fits-all” approach is inappropriate for all cases. Any instances of such practices must be thoroughly investigated, and absolutely unacceptable. The root causes of these issues typically lie in poor work styles and inadequate capacity, requiring deeper systemic solutions. The State Council has issued the “Notice on Comprehensive Administrative Law Enforcement for Ecological and Environmental Protection,” calling for steady progress in reforming comprehensive administrative law enforcement in this field. It aims to coordinate administrative enforcement functions and resource allocation, effectively resolving overlapping and redundant enforcement across multiple levels and departments, while ensuring fair, standardized, and civilized enforcement practices. Many localities have responded to the new policy: Zhejiang Provincial Department of Ecology and Environment and the Zhejiang Provincial Comprehensive Administrative Law Enforcement Guidance Office jointly issued the “Provisional List of Minor Ecological and Environmental Violations Exempt from Penalties in Zhejiang Province.” To all prefecture-level city ecological and environmental bureaus and justice bureaus: In order to implement the spirit of the provincial Party committee and government’s “delegation, regulation, and service” reform, as well as the “Regulations on Optimizing the Business Environment” and the “Zhejiang Provincial Regulations on Promoting Private Enterprise Development,” and to explore inclusive and prudent regulatory practices in the ecological and environmental sector—thereby further stimulating market vitality and promoting sustained, healthy economic development—we hereby issue the “Provisional List of Minor Ecological and Environmental Violations Exempt from Penalties in Zhejiang Province” (hereinafter referred to as the “List”), in accordance with provisions of the “Administrative Penalty Law of the People’s Republic of China” and the “Measures for Environmental Administrative Penalties.” I. Recognize the Importance of Formulating and Implementing the List Formulating and implementing this list is a concrete measure to carry out the guiding principles of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on building a modern environmental governance system, as well as to deepen the provincial Party committee and government’s “delegation, regulation, and service” reform in the ecological and environmental domain. It helps continuously optimize our province’s business environment and promotes coordinated development between the economy, society, and ecological protection. In line with the requirements of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment’s “Guiding Opinions on Further Regulating the Exercise of Discretionary Powers in Environmental Administrative Penalties,” this list refines enforcement discretion in the ecological and environmental field, concretizing and standardizing minor violations that are exempt from penalties under the law. It provides clear guidance for enforcement officers, further enhancing the precision of ecological and environmental law enforcement across the province, standardizing enforcement practices, improving enforcement efficiency, and promoting strict, standardized, fair, and civilized law enforcement. II. Diligently Organize Implementation of the List This list elaborates on Article 27, Paragraph 2 of the Administrative Penalty Law of the People’s Republic of China, which stipulates that “minor violations that are promptly corrected and have not caused harmful consequences shall not be subject to administrative penalties.” It further deepens our province’s initiative to establish a list of minor violation matters subject to notification and commitment. Specifically, the list covers five areas—construction project management, water pollution prevention, air pollution prevention, solid waste pollution prevention, and environmental information disclosure—totaling ten items exempt from penalties. All localities are required to comply, organize training sessions for all enforcement personnel to ensure thorough understanding of the list’s contents and specific application conditions, and strictly adhere to enforcement standards. For environmental violations falling within the scope of the list, decisions of non-penalty must be made in accordance with the law. III. Strict Procedures for Applying Non-Penalty Measures For minor violations meeting the criteria for exemption, investigations must be conducted in accordance with relevant laws and regulations, including the Administrative Penalty Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Measures for Environmental Administrative Penalties. Before applying the list to make a decision of non-penalty, administrative counterparts must be informed of the specific provisions of the list, given the opportunity to present their arguments, and their statements verified. After legal review and collective deliberation by the competent authority, a decision of non-penalty should be issued, accompanied by a formal written notice, and the case properly archived. The ecological and environmental authorities should provide necessary guidance and services to administrative counterparts, educating and encouraging them to voluntarily abide by the law. For cases requiring immediate or time-limited corrections, enforcement officers must document the facts of the violation in the on-site inspection record, issue a formal order to correct the violation, and only grant exemption once the violator has committed to and completed the correction, as confirmed by the officer. If the violator refuses to correct, fails to meet the deadline, or still does not comply after correction, appropriate legal action must be taken. During on-site inspections, care must be taken to avoid directly concluding in documents such as inspection reports or orders to correct violations that “the case falls under the list and thus warrants non-penalty.” For parties already granted exemptions, enforcement officers should strengthen oversight, appropriately increasing the frequency of routine inspections and random checks to ensure continued compliance with the law. IV. Strengthen Implementation and Supervision of the List All localities must elevate their political awareness, reinforce legal thinking and procedural discipline, intensify organizational coordination and supervision of the list’s implementation, and ensure full compliance. Any difficulties or problems encountered during implementation may be reported to the provincial ecological and environmental department at any time, while best practices and exemplary cases can be shared promptly. The provincial ecological and environmental department will regularly monitor and evaluate the list’s implementation, making compliance with the list a key component of enforcement inspections and oversight. Those failing to implement the list rigorously or in accordance with the law will be promptly urged to rectify and publicly criticized. The provincial ecological and environmental department, together with the provincial comprehensive administrative law enforcement guidance office, will adjust the list as needed based on changes in legal frameworks and practical experience, continually refining the province’s system of exemptions from penalties in the ecological and environmental field. This list takes effect from December 29, 2020. Contact Information: Provincial Ecological and Environmental Department, Enforcement Division: Liu Feng, Tel: 0571-28869049; Provincial Justice Department (Provincial Comprehensive Administrative Law Enforcement Guidance Office), Regulatory Guidance Division: Chen Jun, Tel: 0571-81051235. Zhejiang Provincial Department of Ecology and Environment Zhejiang Provincial Comprehensive Administrative Law Enforcement Guidance Office November 27, 2020 (This document is publicly released.) Jiangsu: No More Than Two Environmental Inspections Per Year! Reducing Unnecessary Checks The Jiangsu Provincial Department of Ecology and Environment has issued the “Opinions on Strengthening Corporate Property Rights Protection in Ecological and Environmental Supervision,” aiming to protect corporate property rights without interfering with law-abiding businesses. Enterprises meeting specified criteria are exempted, and the practice of “one-size-fits-all” environmental enforcement is completely prohibited. The opinions stipulate that provincial and municipal ecological and environmental departments should conduct centralized, intensified supervision based on actual planning. As a general rule, inspections and spot checks should be limited to no more than twice per year, thereby reducing unnecessary interference with businesses. Additionally, the opinions strictly limit the number of special enforcement campaigns, setting a cap of six such actions annually, with no region or city allowed to exceed this quota or reorganize existing programs. In areas where environmental pollution is particularly severe and public concern runs high, rigorous investigations and appropriate actions will be undertaken in accordance with the law, avoiding hasty shutdowns or punitive measures. Shandong: Nine Measures to Strictly Prohibit “One-Size-Fits-All” Approaches The Shandong Provincial Government has issued the “Notice on Nine Measures Prohibiting ‘One-Size-Fits-All’ Practices in Safety Production Enforcement,” explicitly stating that, as a general principle, businesses should not be required to suspend operations or shut down.Following a workplace safety accident, the simplified approach of “suspending operations and rectifying all enterprises involved, including similar ones” is, in principle, not adopted. Jinan City: Regulations to Reduce or Exempt 16 Types of Environmental Administrative Penalties The Jinan Municipal Ecology and Environment Bureau has issued the "Implementation Opinions on Reducing and Exempting Administrative Penalties," which outlines sixteen specific circumstances under which environmental administrative penalties may be reduced or exempted—making it the first such regulation nationwide. The document takes effect from the date of its issuance and remains valid for one year. According to the Opinions, if an offense is minor, promptly corrected, and does not result in harmful consequences, punishment may be waived. Ten specific situations are explicitly listed as grounds for exemption, including cases involving entities that have commenced construction without approval, investors or individuals who made investments prior to inspections, facilities exceeding pollutant discharge standards, scattered polluting enterprises, and certain violations related to the absence of monitoring stations or sampling platforms—all of which may be exempted if certain conditions are met. Ten Situations Where Punishment Is Exempted The Opinions state that when an offense is minor and promptly rectified without causing harm, punishment may be waived. Ten specific scenarios eligible for exemption are detailed, including instances involving entities that began construction before obtaining approval, individuals or entities that put projects into operation without undergoing required inspections, facilities discharging pollutants above permitted limits, scattered polluting enterprises, and certain violations concerning the lack of designated monitoring points or sampling platforms. Provided certain conditions are satisfied, these parties may be exempted from penalties. First, for unauthorized construction—projects requiring an environmental impact assessment report or form that commence work without prior approval but remain in the construction phase, produce no pollutants, and where the enterprise voluntarily halts construction or restores the site to its original condition; Second, for entities operating without inspection—where the environmental impact assessment documents have been approved, supporting environmental protection facilities have been constructed according to the assessment requirements and are functioning normally, with pollutants discharged within regulatory limits, yet the project is put into production or use before receiving official acceptance; provided corrective measures are completed within the prescribed timeframe and according to stipulated requirements after being ordered to do so; Third, for individuals responsible for operations without inspection—when the primary person in charge and other relevant personnel at the time of commissioning have already been reassigned or otherwise legitimately relieved of responsibility, and the current responsible personnel have taken over for no more than six months, actively ceasing production and making progress toward compliance, such individuals may be exempted from penalties; Fourth, for excessive pollutant emissions—cases involving air or water pollutants exceeding standards by no more than 0.1 times, pH values between 5 and 10, or noise levels exceeding standards by less than 1 decibel, provided corrective actions are completed the following day and meet established standards, allowing exemption from penalties; Fifth, for "scattered, unregulated, and polluting" enterprises that have independently cleaned up their operations—exemption applies; Sixth, for certain violations involving failure to install monitoring stations or sampling platforms in accordance with regulations and monitoring protocols—provided such non-compliance is detected for the first time and corrective measures are completed within the specified timeframe and requirements after being ordered to do so; Seventh, for failure to maintain original monitoring records for industrial waste gas emissions as required—provided corrective action is promptly undertaken upon being ordered to do so; Eighth, for failing to conduct risk assessments for sudden environmental incidents, identify and address potential environmental hazards, file emergency response plans, provide emergency training, stockpile necessary environmental emergency equipment and supplies, or disclose information related to sudden environmental events—and provided no such incidents have occurred within three years—subject to timely completion of corrective measures after being ordered to do so; Ninth, for failure to establish environmental protection management systems and operational procedures, or for incomplete record-keeping in environmental management ledgers—provided corrective measures are promptly implemented upon being ordered to do so; Tenth, for minor offenses that are promptly rectified without causing any harmful consequences. Six Situations Where Penalties Are Reduced The Opinions also specify six circumstances under which administrative penalties should be legally reduced, including cases involving small and micro-enterprises that proactively eliminate or mitigate the harmful consequences of their violations after inspection, those with relatively small exceedances of standards, facilities experiencing sudden malfunctions or undergoing maintenance, and urban sewage treatment plants whose effluent exceeds standards due to excessively high influent concentrations. Under certain conditions, penalties may be reduced below the statutory minimum, though typically not exceeding 50% of the minimum penalty amount. Notably, this type of regulation reducing penalties at the municipal level represents a national first. First, for small and micro-enterprises that, following inspection, proactively eliminate or mitigate the harmful consequences of their violations; Second, for online monitoring systems where daily average readings exceed…

Innovative Development of the Pesticide Industry

1 Development of the Innovation System 1.1 Status of New Pesticide R&D Platform Construction in China Over the past fifteen years, China has significantly increased its investment in the development of new pesticides and established a number of national-level pesticide science and technology innovation platforms. Supported by various national innovation systems, these platforms have initially formed an independent R&D system and creation methodologies for new pesticides (see Figure 1), resulting in the development of several innovative products with proprietary intellectual property rights. The following provides a brief overview of the main features of China's new pesticide science and technology innovation system. 1.1.1 National-Level Pesticide Science and Technology Innovation Platforms (1) National Southern Pesticide Discovery Center Established in 1995 and officially put into operation after passing the acceptance inspection by the Ministry of Science and Technology in January 2001, this center comprises four bases located in Zhejiang, Shanghai, Jiangsu, and Hunan. Its primary mission is to address the critical need for green pesticide research in China. By focusing on key scientific issues such as identifying novel lead structures and action targets, the center has built an innovative research framework integrating biological knowledge, computer technologies, and modern chemical synthesis techniques. Based on this framework, it conducts discovery and research on low-dosage, ultra-efficient, environmentally friendly new pesticides, providing theoretical and technical guidance to overcome bottlenecks in China’s independent pesticide R&D efforts, thereby laying a solid theoretical and technological foundation for sustainable environmental, ecological, and agricultural development. (2) National Pesticide Engineering Research Center Approved by the State Planning Commission in 1996, this center was constructed under the auspices of Nankai University, with the Institute of Element-Organic Chemistry at Nankai University serving as the implementing unit. In 2001, the Development and Reform Commission approved the establishment of a Shenyang branch. The primary tasks and objectives of the National Pesticide Engineering Research Center are to develop new pesticides, conduct research on their development, carry out engineering-scale studies, and facilitate the translation of scientific findings into productive applications. (3) State Key Laboratory for New Pesticide Discovery and Development Based at the Shenyang Research Institute of Chemical Industry, this laboratory ensures that China’s pesticide research firmly incorporates environmentally friendly criteria from the very beginning of molecular design. It consistently considers safety and environmental assessments of newly synthesized compounds, advocates for ultra-efficient pesticides to minimize environmental impact, seeks novel active substances with new functions and mechanisms of action, addresses existing shortcomings, and enhances compatibility with the environment. Additionally, it emphasizes research on plant regulatory substances, exploring ways to control the growth, development, and reproduction of harmful organisms while improving bioselectivity. By prioritizing technological innovation and staying abreast of international cutting-edge developments, the laboratory strives to position China as a nation capable of inventing new pesticides with independent intellectual property rights. (4) National Pesticide Discovery Engineering Technology Research Center Approved by the Ministry of Science and Technology in December 2005, this national engineering technology research center was established under the auspices of the Hunan Research Institute of Chemical Industry. Its main focus includes research and development in areas such as new pesticide discovery, engineering-scale production of active ingredients and intermediates, pesticide formulation chemistry, pesticide residue analysis, ecotoxicology, environmental behavior, pesticide biology, chemical analysis and testing, and instrument calibration and metrology. (5) National Biopesticide Engineering Technology Research Center Based at the Hubei Academy of Agricultural Sciences, this biopesticide engineering technology research unit received approval from the Ministry of Science and Technology on January 7, 2011. The laboratory primarily conducts research on key and common biopesticide technologies, and, building upon integrated technological achievements, undertakes engineering and industrialization studies related to biopesticides. Ultimately, it aims to establish a comprehensive technical platform for biopesticide R&D, production, and application—both domestically and internationally—and serve as a training base for relevant R&D professionals, providing crucial technical support for the sustainable development of China’s biopesticide industry. (6) National Key Laboratory Cultivation Base for Green Pesticides and Agricultural Bioengineering Located within the Fine Chemical Research and Development Center of Guizhou University, this cultivation base focuses on addressing major challenges related to food security, pest control in crops, and agricultural product quality in China. Guided by western biological resources, it conducts research on green pesticide discovery, identification of molecular targets, continuous pest control technologies, pesticide analysis and environmental impacts, and green synthesis techniques. 1.1.2 Provincial and Ministerial-Level Pesticide Science and Technology Innovation Platforms In addition to the aforementioned national-level new pesticide discovery platforms, China has also successively established a number of provincial and ministerial-level laboratories dedicated to new pesticide development, including: ① The Ministry of Agriculture’s Key Open Laboratory for Pesticide Chemistry and Applied Technologies, jointly established by the Institute of Plant Protection of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences and the College of Science of China Agricultural University; ② The Ministry of Education’s Key Laboratory for Natural Pesticides and Chemical Biology, based at South China Agricultural University, which mainly conducts research on plant-based pesticides, plant protection agents, pesticide residues and environmental toxicology, resistance mechanisms and management of harmful organisms, pesticide formulation processing and application, as well as biopesticide technologies and new pesticide design and synthesis; ③ The Ministry of Education’s Key Laboratory for Green Pesticides and Agricultural Bioengineering, established at the Fine Chemical Research and Development Center of Guizhou University, focusing on green pesticide design, synthesis, target discovery and mechanism of action, process route studies for green pesticides and functional molecules, pesticide analysis and environmental effects, and sustained control of major crop pests and diseases; ④ The Ministry of Education’s Key Laboratory for Pesticide and Chemical Biology, based at Central China Normal University, concentrating on molecular design and synthesis of green pesticides, organic process route studies in new pesticide development, pesticide residue analysis and environmental chemistry, and molecular biology related to pesticide pharmacology; ⑤ The Ministry of Education’s Engineering Research Center for Plant Growth Regulators, built on the foundation of the Crop Chemical Control Research Center at China Agricultural University, integrating internal and external resources, and currently the only ministry-level engineering research center in the field of plant growth substances; ⑥ The Pesticide Industry Technology Innovation Strategic Alliance, founded in April 2010 to promote technological progress in the pesticide industry. This alliance consists of enterprises and institutions voluntarily engaged in the research, development, production, manufacturing, and service of pesticide active ingredients, intermediates, formulations, adjuvants, and related products. 1.2 Development of China’s New Pesticide Creation System Since the Seventh Five-Year Plan period (1985–1989), China has possessed independently developed pesticides. However, systematic research and development of new pesticides truly began during the Ninth Five-Year Plan period, marked by the construction of two major pesticide discovery centers—one in the north and one in the south—which signaled the official start of China’s pesticide R&D efforts. During the Tenth Five-Year Plan period, the focus shifted to conducting research on new pesticide creation and developing key industrialization technologies. The Eleventh Five-Year Plan centered on pesticide creation engineering, while the Twelfth Five-Year Plan, building on earlier work, emphasized the “National Twelfth Five-Year Science and Technology Support Program” and the “R&D and Industrialization of Green Ecological Pesticides,” primarily aimed at advancing the industrialization of previously identified candidate compounds. Furthermore, projects such as the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), the 973 Program, and the 863 Program provided substantial financial support for new pesticide development. With this funding, China made initial progress in fundamental theoretical research and methodological studies related to new pesticides, establishing preliminary theoretical frameworks and methodological foundations for scientific and technological innovation. 1.3 Major Institutions Engaged in New Pesticide Development in China Currently, the main entities involved in new pesticide development in China include universities and select research institutes, with a small number of enterprises also participating. 1.3.1 Universities At present, the leading universities engaged in new pesticide creation include: Guizhou University, Nankai University, Central China Normal University, East China University of Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Northwest A&F University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Zhejiang University of Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University, among others. Many of these universities have already commercialized some of their products. Other institutions, such as Shanghai Normal University, are also actively pursuing research in this area. 1.3.2 Research Institutes Numerous research institutes in China participate in new pesticide development, with many having transformed into enterprises. Prominent companies involved in new pesticide creation include: Jiangsu Pesticide Research Institute, Hunan Research Institute of Chemical Industry, Shanghai Pesticide Research Institute, Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang Research Institute of Chemical Industry, Sichuan Research Institute of Chemical Industry, Zhejiang Research Institute of Chemical Industry, Process Engineering Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. 1.3.3 Enterprises (1) Major Enterprises Involved in New Pesticide Creation At present, very few enterprises in China are directly engaged in new pesticide development. Aside from a handful of research institutes that have transitioned into corporate entities, only a few companies—such as Longwan in Zhejiang, Ruizhe in Dalian, Yangnong in Jiangsu, and Zhongnong in Shandong—are actively undertaking independent pesticide creation and development. (2) Role of Chinese Pesticide Enterprises in New Pesticide Development Due to the high investment and significant risks associated with new pesticide development, most Chinese pesticide companies are reluctant to allocate funds to such research. Instead, they often prefer to compete for patents that are about to expire, which inevitably places them at a disadvantage in the competitive landscape. Nevertheless, a small number of enterprises have undertaken research and development of new pesticide varieties—even if their structures are not entirely novel—recognizing the drawbacks of operating without patent protection. Before the transformation of certain research institutes into enterprises, there were very few companies actively involved in pesticide creation. However, with the gradual transformation of some research institutes, enterprises are poised to become the main driving force behind China’s new pesticide development. For instance, institutions like the Shenyang Research Institute of Chemical Industry and the Hunan Research Institute of Chemical Industry have seen a noticeable increase in the number of new pesticides registered in recent years, becoming key players in China’s new pesticide creation process. 2 Development of Innovative Technologies For a long time, Chinese scholars’ research on theoretical models for new pesticide creation remained relatively weak, with limited influence and few works recognized as mainstream by the international academic community. In recent years, however, Chinese researchers have achieved notable successes in areas such as discovering novel antiviral and fungicidal targets and pioneering new methodologies, proposing multiple original models and methods that have garnered significant international attention. 2.1 Intermediate Derivatization MethodsProfessor Changling Liu of the Shenyang Research Institute of Chemical Industry innovatively proposed a unique “intermediate derivatization method.” He was invited to write an article titled “Application of the Intermediate Derivatization Approach in Agrochemical Discovery” for the internationally renowned journal Chemical Reviews. The article provides a detailed exposition of the essence and applications of this novel approach to agrochemical innovation, offering numerous examples of how it has been used to develop new agrochemical compounds. This method has optimized and improved key aspects such as development time, investment, and efficiency, significantly increasing the success rate of new‑drug discovery. It introduces a fresh methodology and perspective to the field of drug innovation, helping to elevate the standard of new‑drug development, strengthen intellectual‑property protection awareness, and enhance the likelihood of identifying promising candidate compounds. The intermediate derivatization method (IDMs) holds tremendous potential and has attracted widespread attention from international peers in both pharmaceutical and agrochemical R&D circles. From a chemical standpoint, the intermediate derivatization method simplifies complex problems and delivers excellent results. Its core principles are threefold (as shown in Figure 2): 1. Employing intermediates in chemical reactions to synthesize novel compounds, followed by screening to identify lead compounds, which are then optimized to yield new agrochemicals. 2. Using simple starting materials to chemically synthesize new intermediates, substituting portions of the chemical structure of known pesticides or pharmaceuticals with these intermediates to generate novel compounds, which undergo further investigation to produce new agrochemicals. 3. Utilizing known active compounds or agrochemicals as intermediates, conducting chemical reactions to design new compounds, and ultimately discovering new agrochemicals through screening and optimization studies. This approach has already led to the successful development of fungicides such as azoxystrobin, cyprodinil, and azoxystrobin‑amino, delivering significant economic and social benefits. Notably, azoxystrobin received the Excellent Award of the China Patent Award and the First Prize of the 2014 Technology Invention Award from the China Petroleum and Chemical Industry Federation. Meanwhile, the acaricide pyrimidifen and the fungicide bifenazate are currently undergoing registration procedures, while insecticidal compounds SYP‑3409 and 4380, the fungicide 9069, the insecticidal–acaricidal compound 2260, the acaricide 4523, and the herbicide 2194 are all under active research and development. 2.2 A Novel Lead‑Discovery Method Based on Molecular Three‑Dimensional Shape and Pharmacophore Features East China University of Science and Technology has introduced a method that leverages similarity comparisons based on molecular three‑dimensional shape and pharmacophore characteristics to perform scaffold hopping and identify novel active scaffolds. By comprehensively considering both feature similarity and molecular shape similarity—while balancing the advantages and limitations of molecular superposition—this approach plays a crucial role in enhancing the hit rate of virtual screening and improving the efficiency of scaffold‑hopping processes. Using this method, East China University of Science and Technology has identified nearly 200 active scaffolds, laying a solid foundation for subsequent discoveries of new structural frameworks. 2.3 Drug‑Molecule Design Based on Active Fragments Researchers at Nankai University, including Wei‑guang Zhao, have proposed a novel strategy for discovering new agrochemicals: leveraging known active fragment structures and combining them with computer‑aided drug‑molecule design techniques to achieve rational molecular engineering. They introduced a new concept termed “drug‑molecule design based on active fragments” (Figure 4), thereby reducing reliance on protein three‑dimensional structures. Drawing pharmacophores from existing cellulose synthase inhibitors and incorporating di‑alkoxybenzene motifs into valine amide‑type compounds, they discovered highly active molecules. Further enhancing the flexibility of these structures, they identified multiple compounds exhibiting activity surpassing that of enilconazole. To be continued…