The Duplomb law has just been adopted by the National Assembly, causing a shockwave in the agricultural world and beyond. This text, between promises of simplification for farmers and persistent ecological concerns, illustrates a deep political divide. It sparks debates on the French agricultural model. Moreover, it crystallizes as many passions as questions. Thus, this law awakens the biting humor of a France that no longer believes in legislative miracles. However, the country loves to comment on attempts.
A tumultuous adoption, symptom of a major agricultural crisis
On July 9, 2025, the National Assembly adopted the Duplomb law with 316 votes in favor and 223 against. The Senate had already given its green light. Result: the government majority, the Les Républicains and Rassemblement National groups applaud. However, the left, the ecologists, and part of the center hold their noses. It almost feels like a new pension reform, tractor version.
The genesis of this law lies in an explosive social context. The winter of 2024 saw angry farmers marching on French roads. Reason: standards deemed absurd, foreign competition perceived as unfair; and the feeling of being the turkeys of the European farce. Senators Laurent Duplomb and Franck Menonville then launched a bill, to which the government promised accelerated processing. At this stage, everyone promises "quick solutions." The rest is known: legislative speed-dating.
What does the Duplomb law really change for our farmers?
First hot point: the derogatory reintroduction of acetamiprid. This insecticide, a member of the very exclusive club of neonicotinoids banned in France but tolerated elsewhere in Europe, is making a comeback. Beet, hazelnut, or other crop producers lacking effective alternatives are celebrating. But the victory is framed: use under surveillance and a review clause after three years, then annually. Moreover, there is a promise that it will concern "at most only 1.7% of agricultural land." This is what the rapporteur Julien Dive claims. One can sense the French compromise, where everyone wants everything… without upsetting anyone (or only a little).
Next, the text tackles paperwork, a true rural scourge. For any livestock extension or construction, the farmer can opt for a public meeting or a town hall session. The environmental authorization threshold rises from 150 to 200 dairy cows. Supporters welcome the simplification, believing it will boost investment. Opponents are already talking about the revenge of mad cows: who will monitor the environmental effects?
Third explosive topic: water management. The law encourages the construction of "mega-basins" to store irrigation water. For agricultural unions, it’s progress, almost biblical: water is life, and the mega-basin is survival. For ecologists, it’s an outrage and a "giant Tupperware" that plunders groundwater. It feeds the mirage of limitless agriculture.
The stakes and contradictions of a hybrid text
Is the Duplomb law a courageous response to farmers’ distress, or an abandonment of ecological principles in open fields? The question divides.
On one side, farmers applaud with both hands, even both boots. For them, this law finally reflects an acknowledgment of field difficulties. The derogations, simplification, water management: all these would be breaths of fresh air for a profession at the end of its rope. Arnaud Rousseau, president of the FNSEA, speaks of the "culmination of an eighteen-month mobilization," and Minister Annie Genevard celebrates "a long-awaited response to the distress of the agricultural world."
On the other side, NGOs, scientists, and minority unions like the Confédération paysanne denounce an unprecedented environmental setback. "We are only establishing a derogation…" promises the majority, "bee killer!" respond the beekeepers. The reintroduction of acetamiprid would be, according to them, a deplorable signal for biodiversity, public health, and France’s image. Appeals to the Constitutional Council are already being prepared, brandishing the precautionary principle as a scarecrow.
More deeply, opponents worry about the rampant industrialization of agriculture. "A model without farmers," where one would speak of "factory farms" rather than family farms. Thomas Gibert, spokesperson for the Confédération paysanne, sums up the bitterness: "This bill does not address our main demand, which is to live decently from our work for all farmers."
Food sovereignty or ecological setback: France at a crossroads
Should we choose between food sovereignty and environmental protection? For the law’s defenders, it’s not a choice but a necessity. They believe that without these adjustments, France risks importing more, losing its independence, and letting its rurality die. The specter of "farm France" being carved up by globalization is invoked. An old classic that hits the mark, especially on the eve of elections.
Opponents, however, see a dangerous precedent. The "anti-ecological law" denounced by Aurélie Trouvé (LFI) embodies, in their eyes, the privatization of water. Moreover, it symbolizes the headlong rush towards ever more agricultural intensification. "We’ll end up watering corn with champagne at this rate!" jokes an environmental activist on social media. Humor does not lower the tension.
An agricultural policy under constant tension
The Duplomb law offers an unvarnished mirror of French contradictions. Produce more, but pollute less. Simplify, but sacrifice nothing to the environment. Make farmers happy, without causing hives among beekeepers or associations. Here we find the great tradition of French compromise, where everyone leaves with a consolation prize. However, it also leaves a vague sense of incompleteness.
But, let’s be honest, who has ever seen a text on agriculture reach consensus in France? The public debate here matches the stakes: visceral, fueled by rural images, collective memory, and very contemporary fears. This law, whatever one thinks of it, has had the merit of putting the agricultural question back at the center. Although it does not solve everything, it highlights that agriculture remains a pillar of our identity. Moreover, it constitutes an inexhaustible source of passionate debates.
Prospects: what future for the Duplomb law?
In the short term, the ball is in the court of the Constitutional Council. The appeals promise some fine legal battles. In the medium term, France will have to account to Europe, which does not like national derogations from its regulations. Finally, the test will be on the ground: will farmers really see their daily lives simplified? Will ecologists notice a degradation or a status quo?
At a time when drought is intensifying, agricultural prices are plummeting, and young people are deserting the countryside, the issue goes far beyond the Duplomb law. The real challenge: inventing a resilient, profitable, and sustainable agriculture. Nothing less. We can always laugh about it… or cry, depending on the mood of the day and the August weather.
A debate that is just beginning
The Duplomb law will likely neither save nor condemn the agricultural world. But it forces everyone to take a stand, to move beyond ready-made speeches. Perhaps this is, ultimately, its greatest utility: reminding us that the land, in France, remains everyone’s business. While waiting for the next "great agricultural law," let’s bet that France will at least continue to debate with passion… and sometimes a touch of dark humor.
Update — July 19, 2025 — Citizens’ petition
The petition “Stop the Duplomb Law — For Health, Safety, and Collective Intelligence,” hosted on the official website of the French National Assembly, has gathered nearly 440,000 signatures. This places it among the most‑supported citizen initiatives since the platform was launched in 2020. Under French rules, every petition that clears 100 k signatures is automatically reviewed by the relevant parliamentary committee. If it reaches 500 k signatures distributed across at least 30 départements (administrative regions somewhat comparable to U.S. counties), the Conference of Presidents—the body that sets the Assembly’s agenda—may schedule a public debate in the full chamber. Such a debate would be deliberative only; it carries no binding vote but dramatically raises the political profile of the issue. Note for foreign readers: signing is restricted to French citizens residing in France. The petition can be viewed here: https://petitions.assemblee-nationale.fr/initiatives/i-3014