Tomorrow, representatives of the EU and Mercosur countries will sign a free trade agreement in Paraguay.

In Ireland, debate over the deal has centred on agriculture and beef trade, with concerns raised about whether beef produced in Mercosur countries is subject to the same veterinary drug controls, residue monitoring, and traceability requirements as EU producers.

The All Ireland Science Media Centre asked experts to comment.

Dr Patrick Wall, Emeritus Professor, UCD Institute for Food and Health, University College Dublin, comments:

“EU farmers operate under a precautionary regulatory regime: growth-promoting hormones are prohibited in EU production and the same prohibition applies to imports, with certification/controls expected to ensure imported beef is hormone-free. Likewise, antibiotic growth promoters have been banned in the EU for years to manage the risks of antimicrobial resistance (AMR).

“For pesticides, the EU sets legally enforceable maximum residue limits for both EU produce and imports, but the practical issue is that some Mercosur production systems can involve different authorised substances and use-patterns, so compliance relies heavily on robust residue monitoring, traceability and credible “system guarantees”.

“Evidence from EU audit work shows where that assurance can fail: a 2024 Commission audit of Brazil concluded that arrangements intended to guarantee EU-destined cattle/meat had never been treated with oestradiol-17β were ineffective, and that the Brazilian government authority responsible for health certification could not reliably attest compliance with EU rules.

“If detection/enforcement is not strengthened in parallel with any increased import volume, the risks are (i) non-compliant residues entering the EU market (with impacts on public-health, AMR and consumer-confidence), and (ii) that it would no longer be a fair, level playing field between EU farmers and foreign exporters. Scientifically, the obvious mitigation is to scale up and sharpen EU oversight—more frequent/targeted third-country audits and follow-up, tighter conditions on listing/certification, and risk-based border sampling and laboratory capacity, so the control system remains credible when more product is coming in.

“It is worth separating food hygiene/eating quality from production-system equivalence. Argentina and Uruguay are long-established suppliers into premium export markets, and consumer studies in Europe show Uruguayian and Argentinian beef is acceptable to EU consumers, consistent with their reputation for high eating quality.

“Furthermore, abattoirs in Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil that currently export to the EU must operate under official controls and certification arrangements designed to meet EU hygiene and consumer-safety requirements, and they are delivering chilled, vacuum-packed products that remain in good condition over a long logistics chain. The very extended shelf-life being achieved indicates good hygiene in the slaughter facilities and the correct vacuum-pack and temperature conditions.

“The Mercosur debate, therefore, is not primarily about whether chilled beef can arrive in the EU in good physical condition (the deal itself anticipates substantial volumes of fresh/chilled product), but whether upstream controls on hormones, antibiotics, pesticides and traceability guarantees are consistently strong enough to support the EU’s required attestations at scale.

“Recent EU audit findings on Brazil’s ability to guarantee hormone-free status for EU-destined beef illustrate why enforcement assurance matters: if the system guarantees are weak, non-compliant products can enter despite good hygiene.

“Stronger checks and monitoring will require more resources and additional costs, but these should be highlighted at the outset and should be a prerequisite to proceeding with import of beef and beef products.”

Declaration of interest: “I have no conflicts of interest”

Dr Gavin Collins, Associate Professor of Microbiology, Ryan Institute and School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, University of Galway, comments: 

“As night follows day, the use of antibiotics against bacterial infections results in the development of antibiotic (or antimicrobial) resistance (AMR) amongst microorganisms, such as bacteria. We must be careful stewards of the antibiotics we have, including veterinary antibiotics, so that they remain effective and we limit the spread of AMR. Indeed, similarly, there is concern over the careful use of anti-parasitic veterinary medicines, and the development of anti-parasitic resistance. The World Health Organisation (WHO) identifies AMR as one of the top-ten public health threats facing society.

“Ireland’s most recent (third) National Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance (iNAP3) is the country’s joined-up strategy on AMR. iNAP3 aims to improve surveillance of antibiotic use and AMR prevalence; improve detection of infection; reduce infection and disease; and reduce antibiotic consumption in Ireland by nearly 30% by 2030.

“In Mercosur countries, such as Brazil, national action plans for AMR prevention have also been developed, but easy, or illegal, access to veterinary antibiotics has been reported.

“Ireland’s farmers are now subject to seriously stringent systems, including the new National Veterinary Prescription System, to tightly control the use of veterinary medicines, and records must be maintained of medicines used so as to comply with Bord Bia quality assurance schemes.

“The concern, quite obviously, for Irish farmers is that they will be critically disadvantaged by the Mercosur deal due to differential enforcement of AMR-related regulations. There are concerns too that EU food safety standards may be undermined, and potentially that AMR may be spread from meat products contaminated with antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

“The European Commission says the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement will ensure effective compliance with EU rules on food safety. The Commission has also said cooperation and coordination in international food systems will contribute to fighting AMR. That is a worthy goal, but it will likely take time for Mercosur standards and compliance systems to match those inside the EU. The Commission will in the meantime be pressured to strengthen the deal’s transparency.”

Declaration of interest: None

Dr Sinéad Waters, Principal Investigator and Lecturer in Microbiology, Sustainable World Section, School of Biological and Chemical Sciences and Ryan Institute, University of Galway, comments: 

“The Mercosur trade deal raises significant concerns among Irish farmers, rural communities and the general public on many fronts. Irish agriculture operates under very strict environmental, animal welfare and food safety standards to ensure Irish beef is of the highest quality and as such is well-respected internationally. Serious concerns have therefore been raised by the farming community regarding issues such as meat traceability and public health particularly around the illegal use of antibiotics and hormones in animals to produce large quantities of low-cost Mercosur beef. These anxieties were in fact realised recently when a prohibited growth hormone called oestradiol was discovered in beef originating in Brazil that entered Ireland in December leading to the product being recalled.

“What is justifiably frustrating for the farming community is the very unfair playing field created due to our strict environmental and animal welfare standards that Irish farmers are required to comply with as part their agri-environmental schemes while imported beef can be produced without any such regulatory framework. Farmers have committed to complying with high standards set out by our regulators by adopting low GHG measures on farm and in some cases by investing heavily to upgrade their farms to support alignment with national and EU regulations while at the same their time South American competitors will not have to satisfy any such requirements. From an environmental perspective, we know that South American beef production is associated with the clearing of the Amazon rainforest and with lower environmental standards and regulations. As such it makes little sense from a global environmental perspective to support the import of Mercosur beef, when the carbon footprint of Irish beef is known to be lower than South American prior to being transported halfway across the world to the European market.”

Declaration of interest: None