UK fertilisers: regulatory reform

The United Kingdom (UK) government, the Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive (referred to collectively throughout this document as ‘all four governments’) are committed to ensuring the UK has access to safe and effective fertilisers.

Fertilisers regulation is a devolved policy area and all four governments have worked together in accordance with the Fertilisers: provisional common framework to produce this consultation and call for evidence, which focuses on proposals to develop a new regulatory framework (the ‘UK Fertilising Product Regulations’ (“UK FPR”)) for placing fertilising products on the market. The proposed regulatory framework aims to better support UK fertiliser supply and resilience, consumer interests, maintain health and safety standards, and contribute to environmental targets and duties. These broad aims mean that whilst fertiliser policy is a devolved area it intersects with some reserved areas, for example health and safety regulation and international trade. Where UK government has reserved competence for areas which intersect with fertilisers policy, it has worked closely with the Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Executive to develop the proposals for UK FPR.

The current legislative framework for fertilisers is highly fragmented, comprising multiple pieces of legislation. Despite the complexity of the framework, it has not substantially changed in over 20 years and is limited in scope as it largely only covers inorganic mineral fertilisers.

During this time, the impact of inorganic fertiliser manufacture on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the impact of nutrients released from inorganic fertilisers and organic materials into the environment has become more fully understood. There are now Government targets and commitments to reduce the impact of nutrients on air and water quality, as well as increased concern about the impact of contaminants that may be found in materials applied to land, for example, chemicals and microplastics and their effects on soil function, health, and the wider environment.

The legislative framework for fertilisers could do more to support enhancement and protection of the environment, for example, it only places requirements on the nutrient levels of products that are within scope, and not on any contaminants that may be present.

The limited scope of the current legislative framework for fertiliser means that there are limited or no, quality or compositional regulatory requirements for newer products, such as plant biostimulants and controlled-release fertilisers. These products may offer potential to improve farm productivity, reduce fertiliser costs and reduce air and water pollution through more efficient and effective use of nutrients. The lack of regulatory requirements, however, poses a potential risk to the environment and human health. Low consumer confidence is an obstacle to innovation and investment in these potentially more sustainable products. 

There are also no regulatory requirements in current fertilisers legislation for novel fertilising products that are emerging from alternative and novel technologies, producing products from a range of biological wastes and organic materials. These novel products may, however, be subject to other regulatory regimes which exist to protect the environment and reduce risks to animal and human health such as, waste regulations and animal by-products regulations. The recovery and reuse of nutrients from waste, could potentially support a more circular economy and avoid or reduce emissions associated with inorganic fertiliser production. At present the emissions savings associated with these emergent products are unquantified. Significant uncertainty remains around these products, and their risks and benefits.

Volatility in the fertiliser market caused by fluctuation in natural gas prices and supply issues related to global conflicts have heightened concerns around availability and supply of inorganic fertiliser to the UK. Both greater access to a wider range of fertiliser products on the market, and by creating a legislative framework that can be updated more easily could improve on this situation. However, it would need be flexible to keep pace with innovation and handle varying levels if risk from a wider range of fertilising products and materials.

All four governments therefore propose to use powers under the Agriculture Act 1970 (as amended by the Agriculture Act 2020) (“Agriculture Act”) (and other suitable powers to) repeal existing fertilisers legislation and replace it with a conformity assessment framework (UK FPR). Conformity assessment is a process used in other manufactured goods areas in the UK, for example lifts, machinery and pyrotechnics, as well as the European Union (EU) Fertilising Product Regulations (Regulation (EU) 2019/1009) (“EU FPR”), to demonstrate that products placed on the market conform to the requirements expressed in the provisions of the relevant legislation.

We are proposing that UK FPR is similar to EU FPR to make it simpler for industry to follow the rules, although, with the specific regulatory requirements (for example, product requirements) adjusted as required to meet UK needs. However, at the first stage of implementation, if the outcome of this consultation and call for evidence is that the proposals for UK FPR are followed, we are proposing conformity assessment requirements would be implemented for a smaller range of fertilising products and component materials than EU FPR.  

This is due to uncertainties over the benefits and the wider environmental and human health impacts of newer and novel fertilisers, as well as market readiness of alternative and novel technologies for producing fertilisers in the UK context. Implementation of UK FPR will need to be an iterative process, and a conformity assessment framework would lend itself to this process because it is a modular, risk-based approach. The framework would allow all four governments to phase new fertilising products and materials into UK FPR once the requirements that should apply to them are better understood and the regulatory requirements could be tailored according to the level of risk presented by the fertilising product.

Implementing a conformity assessment framework for fertilisers in the UK, which is similar to EU FPR would also minimise friction for imports and exports between UK and EU markets, and it would also help maintain regulatory predictability for international suppliers and investors.

UK FPR would aim to provide a harmonised set of rules for placing domestically produced and imported fertilising products on the market in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. This would mitigate significant risks which could be caused by regulatory divergence, and a stable regulatory environment would enable businesses to plan longer-term strategic outcomes and encourage innovation and investment in the sector.   

We are proposing the new regime would also make provisions in relation to ammonium nitrate (AN) fertilisers with high nitrogen content, which have additional safety and technical requirements to address risks posed to public and worker safety.

Use and application of fertilisers is outside the scope of the proposed UK FPR and is managed by other legislation, which would continue to exist alongside the proposed UK FPR regime.

The approach being considered for implementation of UK FPR is that it would be applied in a co-ordinated manner across the UK.

It is possible to implement UK FPR in Northern Ireland, without detriment to the Windsor Framework in Northern Ireland because the rules and regulations surrounding the manufacture and marketing of fertilisers in the EU are ‘partial’. This means fertilisers may be made available on the single market in accordance with both harmonised EU legislation and national laws (due to the local nature of certain product markets).Therefore, UK FPR could operate alongside EU FPR in Northern Ireland as a domestic legislative framework, meaning manufacturers and importers would be able to choose in Northern Ireland only whether to market fertilisers under EU FPR or UK FPR.

This is a joint consultation and call for evidence, and the document has been broken down into three substantive parts. Section 2 ‘Background’; Section 4 ‘Consultation Questions’; and Section 5 ‘Call for Evidence’.

Section 2 ‘Background’ provides details of the current legislative framework for fertilisers in the UK and information about the factors that have informed the proposals developed by all four governments for UK FPR.

Section 4 ‘Consultation Questions’ outlines the proposals for UK FPR at the first stage of implementation. This includes the overarching conformity assessment framework, general product requirements all fertilising products marketed under UK FPR would have to meet as well as the types of technical requirements products prioritised for conformity assessment would need to meet, although not the exact limit values or other detailed parameters at this stage.

Section 5 ‘Call for Evidence’ has been developed to inform future development of UK fertilisers legislation. We are calling for views and evidence on newer and novel fertilising products and materials including: the usage and perception of plant biostimulants in the UK, ‘green claims’ used to market fertilising products, alternative processing technologies and nutrient recovery.

If the outcome of this consultation and call for evidence is that the proposals for UK FPR are progressed, we propose to establish the detailed parameters which would apply to products and the more technical aspects of UK FPR after this consultation and call for evidence has ended through a series of technical workshops with stakeholders. The technical workshops may also be used to further consult on the aspects of UK FPR covered by this consultation. Section 4.11 explains this approach in more detail and how you can register your interest in participating in this technical stakeholder engagement process. There may also be further public consultations on aspects of UK FPR not covered by this consultation or on aspects covered by this consultation, that are subsequently further developed. 

We propose inorganic fertilisers, liming materials, nitrification inhibitors and urease inhibitors (collectively referred to as 'inhibitors') made from virgin material substances and mixtures are prioritised for conformity assessment due to the high certainty around their benefits and risks. Prioritising these products would allow all four governments to establish UK FPR and the underpinning conformity assessment framework whilst progressing further research and policy development into newer and novel fertilisers.