Experts Discuss Why The Herbicide Pipeline Is Empty

It's been 30 years since the last new class of herbicides, HPPD inhibitors, launched, says Rex Liebl, herbicide global product development manager for BASF. Many of today's "new" chemistries are really old chemistries, such as 2,4-D and dicamba, now paired with tolerant traits. 

 

So where's all the new chemistry? What's up with the 30-year gap? 

 

John Combest, communications manager with Monsanto, says it's not for lack of trying. "We're always looking to discover new chemistries and new classes of chemistries. That's part of what we do," he explains. "It's really challenging, scientific work." 

 

Here are five reasons why discovering and launching new herbicide chemistry is so difficult: 

 

1. It takes time. From discovering a compound to launching a new product, companies put in 10 to 14 years of research and testing, says John McGregor, early product development manager with Bayer. And in that time, companies like Bayer comb through 100,000 substances that may or may not fit the bill for a potential new herbicide. "There are many successes and many failures," he notes. 

 

See related story below: "Herbicides: From discovery to launch" 

 

2. Herbicide discoveries wax and wane. During the 1980s and 1990s, new mode-of-action discoveries led to multiple new chemistries, McGregor explains. "There are only so many pathways or processes in the plant that you can exploit," he notes. And those pathways are already the target of existing chemistries. Today, product development teams focus on unearthing any other possible pathway that could be used to control weeds. And that, McGregor notes, takes time. 

 

3. Companies hit the brakes. When Roundup Ready launched in 1996, glyphosate-tolerant corn, soybeans and cotton flooded the marketplace, and glyphosate quickly devalued the herbicide market, Liebl notes. Crop protection companies cut back on herbicide research in the early 2000s. Research efforts ramped back up after "holes" in glyphosate programs became clear. Today, BASF is funding herbicide research at preboom levels, Liebl adds. 

 

4. There are fewer players. More than 20 crop protection companies worked on new product development during the herbicide boom of the 1970s and 1980s, Liebl notes. Today, only a handful of companies remain. He adds that a year from now, there could be four companies if pending mergers and acquisitions go through. 

 

"Clearly, to some degree, it's about numbers," Liebl explains. "When you have fewer companies involved, there are less opportunities to find [new active ingredients]." 

Video: How Can We Grow More Food With Less Impact?

For over two decades, Dr. Mitloehner has been at the forefront of research on how animal agriculture affects our air and our climate. With deep expertise in emissions and volatile organic compounds, his work initially focused on air quality in regions like California’s Central Valley—home to both the nation’s richest agricultural output and some of its poorest air quality.

In recent years, methane has taken center stage in climate discourse—not just scientifically, but politically. Once a topic reserved for technical discussions about manure management and feed efficiency, it has become a flashpoint in debates over sustainability, regulation, and even the legitimacy of livestock farming itself.

Dr. Frank Mitloehner, Professor and Air Quality Specialist with the CLEAR Center sits down with Associate Director for Communications at the CLEAR Center, Joe Proudman.