Before the EU introduced a union-wide cadmium limit of 60 mg/kg for fertilizers, Germany had maintained a stricter limit of 50 mg/kg. However, with the EU-wide adoption of the higher limit, Germany’s original threshold has effectively been overridden and, in practice, is no longer enforceable.
)
Germany’s cadmium limit for fertilizers, though cautious, falls short of Europe’s most ambitious standards. Finland, for instance, upholds a stringent 22 mg/kg cap, demonstrating strong environmental leadership. Additionally, Finland secured an EU Commission exemption that bans fertilizers exceeding 50 mg/kg cadmium from its market. In contrast, Germany, lacking such an exemption, is now bound by the EU’s broader 60 mg/kg limit—a less stringent standard that has frustrated environmental and public health advocates concerned about cadmium exposure.
This regulatory gap provides Germany’s agricultural industry with a short-term advantage by allowing continued access to inexpensive, yet toxic, fertilizers. The cadmium debate in Germany was ultimately shaped by the Industrieverband Agrar (IVA), the agriculture trade association, which successfully prioritized uniform EU cadmium limits over environmental concerns. The IVA, which favors EU-wide harmonization, benefits from Germany adhering to the less stringent 60 mg/kg EU limit, as this approach protects the industry's immediate financial interests despite environmental trade-offs.
Due to the dangers associated with cadmium, German environmental organizations, such as the Umweltbundesamt, emphasize the importance of using cadmium-containing fertilizers in a controlled and regulated manner. They advocate for strict compliance with dosing limits to protect soil, water, climate, and biodiversity.
Industry stakeholders opposing stricter limits, both at the Member State and EU levels, overlook the long-term costs of environmental degradation. Continuing to use cadmium at current levels threatens lasting damage to soil and biodiversity, which could ultimately result in much higher economic and environmental costs for the same German industries that resist change today. In this context, it is clear that the EU must take the initiative in setting stricter regulations, as the current inconsistencies in limits represent a missed opportunity to enhance environmental and public health protection. It remains to be seen how the EU soil mission will be addressed in the upcoming mandate, but one hopes for an ambitious approach that ensures the harmonization of these limits across all Member States.
For further information: https://www.ruokavirasto.fi/en/foodstuffs/food-sector/contaminants-and-residues/contaminants/metals-in-foods/cadmium/ https://www.iva.de/industrieverband-agrar/themen-positionen/industrieverband-agrar-fuer-europaweiten-grenzwert-cadmium https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/Node/8783#dungemittel-was-ist-das