Pesticide Reducing Instruments— An Interdisciplinary Analysis Of Effectiveness And Optimality

Abstract

Abstract For decades the concerns about the impact of modern agriculture’s use of pesticides have been one of the most debated environmental issues in many developed countries. The use of pesticides has contributed on a large scale to increased production and lower product prices. However, this usage is associated with a number of negative environmental consequences. There is a risk that pesticides will pollute water resources (drinking water and groundwater resources). Pesticide usage is also expected to have a negative impact on the level of biodiversity as well as possible negative health effects. In Denmark, the agricultural sector accounts for 80 per cent of the total pesticide usage in Denmark. Several action plans have aimed at reducing the use of pesticides. The first was introduced in 1986 with the specific target of cutting both the pesticide treatment frequency index (TFI)6 and quantity of active sub-stance used by 50 per cent. An evaluation of the plan concluded that treatment frequency was unchanged while active substance was reduced by 36 per cent, but this was mostly due to the introduction of new low dosage products. Therefore, a pesticide tax was introduced in 1996 and subsequently doubled in 1998, resulting in a value tax of approximately 50 per cent of the wholesale value. In 1999, a multidisciplinary committee analysed legal, health, and cost issues related to pesticide usage (Bichel Committee, 1999), including impact assessment of radical reductions in the use of pesticides. The work of the Bichel Committee led to the Pesticide Action Plan II in 2000,7 with the aim of reducing the TFI to below 2.0 by 2002 (from 2.45 in 1999).