If glyphosate went away, farming wouldn’t stop — but weed control would get more expensive and more complicated.
That’s the takeaway from a newly published Illinois-focused paper in Weed Technology that estimates a statewide annual loss of $300 million to $609 million for Illinois corn and soybean producers. The study frames glyphosate not just as a herbicide input, but as a system tool that helps support conservation tillage, reduce fuel and labor needs, and simplify weed-control programs.
Using what the authors describe as a staged, evidence-based framework, the paper estimates what a complete glyphosate ban could mean for Illinois agriculture through both higher weed-control costs and potential yield drag. The authors say their manuscript is the first to offer a transparent, evidence-based assessment of how glyphosate removal would affect farm revenues through both yield and cost channels.
What the paper found
The core message is straightforward: most farms could adapt, but adaptation would come at a cost.
According to the paper, timing to achieve similar control replacement programs would likely require:
- more herbicide products
- more passes across the field
- tighter application
That means the biggest hit would likely be to profitability and management complexity, not necessarily a sudden collapse in production.
The paper also argues glyphosate’s value goes beyond the price per jug. In Illinois corn and soybean systems, the authors say it has helped lower production costs and stabilize yields while supporting reduced-tillage systems. Farmers already relying on layered residuals, multiple modes of action and broader resistance-management practices would likely be in a better position than those still leaning heavily on glyphosate alone.
Why it matters now in Illinois
In Illinois, the issue is no longer purely hypothetical.
HB 3803, titled “PESTICIDES-GLYPHOSATE BAN,” would prohibit the distribution, sale, offer for sale or use of glyphosate products in the state if enacted. The bill was filed Feb. 7, 2025, received its first reading on Feb. 18, 2025, and was referred the same day to the House Rules Committee. The Illinois General Assembly bill-status page still shows that referral as the bill’s last action, meaning there is no public sign at this point that it has moved further.
“We’ve had in past legislative sessions, bills to ban certain pesticides. Whether it be things like glyphosate, there’s been bills to ban 2,4-D, dicamba, neonic insecticides,” says Dr. Aaron Hager of University of Illinois. “You look at some of the bills that have been proposed, and on paper, they seem to be fairly simple. I’ve seen these bills that are one sentence: the sale and use of pesticide X in the state of Illinois is prohibited. That’s the bill. But yet, what the hope was by doing this kind of a study would be, can we quantify what effects that would have on the Illinois farmers. It seems like a straightforward, a simple solution to a complex problem, but there can be very significant financial consequences of that.”
Who wrote the paper
The author team brings together economics, policy and weed science. The authors are Sandy Dall’erba, Corey Lacey and Aaron Hager. The paper identifies Dall’erba as a professor in Agricultural and Consumer Economics at the University of Illinois, Hager as a professor and Extension weed scientist in Crop Sciences at Illinois, and Lacey as environmental policy manager for the Illinois Soybean Association.
“Once you get to the numbers, we’re fairly confident that, if anything, this was a fairly conservative estimate of what it would cost Illinois farmers. I don’t think we really overestimated that loss in terms of financial loss at all,” Hager says.
