Glyphosate remains a sensitive subject.  It is viewed as an essential herbicide by the majority of farmers, but has a challenging consumer reputation, evidence by the approach to it from local authorities, who in many cases have removed it as their standard weed treatment.

The change in approach from Brighton & Hove City Council, picked up in the BBC's article and also The Telegraph, is relevant.   The stated reasons and the effect of this from a symbolic point of view (not least given Brighton's green credentials) could be significant.  

Some will draw comfort from it that it may herald a more science-based approach, as they see it.  The change in the way it is to be applied, mixed with oil to help avoid drift and applied in a controlled droplet way, points towards a higher level of precision targeting in the further deployment of chemicals, with a greater focus on delivering the chemical to the precise spot where it is needed.

The article quotes an adverse response from a pressure group opposed to pesticide use, and this move will surely prompt more such objections, as it may be perceived to be a turning of the tide on this issue.

And while glysophate remains possibly the essential tool in the armoury of many regenerative farmers, and as regenerative practices spread, the debate around the deployment of that chemical, and what it means for the nature of produce from the land where it is used, will surely become louder.