This article explores how cosmetic standards in the citrus industry are pressuring Spanish farmers to use unnecessary pesticides, and what can be done to change it.

Introduction:

When we think of the fruit we buy, we often imagine perfection: bright color, smooth skin, flawless appearance. But behind every perfect orange on a supermarket shelf, there is a hidden cost, one that is increasingly borne by the very people who grow our food.

At Chiisai we spent time on the ground with citrus farmers in southern Spain, talking directly to those who feed Europe and beyond. And one issue came up again and again: farmers are pressured to use pesticides not to improve food safety or yields, but for pure aesthetics.

The Problem with the Peel

The culprit: a tiny insect called Scirtothrips citri thrips . These tiny insects feed on the outer layer of citrus peel, leaving subtle gray marks. While these marks are superficial and do not affect the taste, shelf life or safety of the fruit in any way, their impact on a grower's income can be devastating.

Distributors pay much less, or outright reject, fruit that shows imperfections, however minor. And it's not because the fruit doesn't comply with regulations. In fact, these branded fruits often meet all European Union (EU) safety and quality standards. The problem lies elsewhere.

Aesthetic, Not Sanitary Standards

The real pressure comes not from consumers or public health officials, but from distributors and retailers, who impose aesthetic standards far stricter than any legal norm. These standards are driven by assumptions about what people will buy, rather than by scientific or nutritional need.

As a result, farmers invest in additional pesticide treatments, treatments that have no agronomic benefit, solely to avoid economic loss. These decisions are made not to protect crops from real threats, but to comply with a supply chain that equates "nice" with "valuable".

At the same time, pesticide reduction targets in the EU are increasingly stringent, and farmers' profit margins are already very low. Farmers are caught between two opposing forces: they are required to use fewer chemicals while needing to use more just to stay afloat.

Let's be clear: this is not about food waste in the traditional sense. It's about market access. Perfect looking fruit sells. Fruit with slight imperfections, while completely safe and delicious, does not.

Daños estéticos de la trips en cítricos.

Daños estéticos de la trips en cítricos.

Cítricos sin trips en árbol.

What Can Be Done?

This situation is not inevitable. There are clear and feasible steps that the various stakeholders in the food system can take to change the rules and support farmers who are doing the right thing for the planet and public health.

For Technical Experts and Agricultural Advisors:

Technical advisors play a key role in the decisions farmers make. Here are opportunities for:

• Initiate honest conversations with grower networks about which pest treatments are really necessary and which are merely cosmetic.

• Explore alternatives such as biological or low-residue solutions, especially against pests such as thrips that do not pose a health threat.

• Encourage better data collection to evidence cases where fruits that meet EU standards are similarly rejected. This evidence can support future policy reforms and open dialogue across the industry.

For Agricultural Cooperatives and Distributors:

Those who manage the collection, grading and marketing of fruit can directly influence how the product is graded and positioned. Some key actions:

• Push for updated grading guidelines that prioritize safety and sustainability over visual perfection.

• Test market acceptance of cosmetically imperfect but safe fruit. There are many signs that consumers value environmental impact more than an Instagram-worthy appearance.

• Negotiate fairer terms with buyers that reflect the true costs of sustainable production. If sustainability is a shared goal, the price must also reflect it.

It is time to close the gap between EU sustainability targets and market-driven aesthetic standards. This is a political challenge - and also an opportunity.

• Revisit this disconnect, recognizing how aesthetic criteria can unintentionally undermine environmental objectives.

• Ensure that incentives and regulations do not punish those who reduce input use and adopt greener practices. They should be rewarded, not marginalized.

Conclusion: A System That Values More Than Appearance

At Chiisai, we believe that farmers should not be forced to choose between green practices and economic survival. With the right tools, the right advice and above all fairer standards, they can become world leaders in sustainable production.

The problem is not just with citrus. It is a sign of how a food system can become misaligned when visual perfection is prioritized over resilience, biodiversity and equity.

So we ask: Why do we demand fruit that looks perfect... if that standard comes at a cost to farmers, ecosystems and the resilience of our food systems?

It's time to rethink what quality really means. Not just for citrus, but for the future of agriculture.