industry and environment - DTIE

Chemicals management
The first Danish Pesticide Action Plan was
developed in 1986, with the objective of reducing
pesticide use by 50% before 1997 (measured
in both tonnes of active ingredient and frequency
of treatment). This plan did not include any
effective proposal. It was largely opposed by
farmers. Consequently, treatment frequency was
reduced by only 8% although the switch to lowdose
pesticides resulted in a 47% reduction in
the weight of active ingredient. The government
also reviewed all pesticide registration. As a
result, only 78 of 213 chemicals were approved
for use. In 1996 the government introduced a
pesticide tax, which was set at 54% of the price
for insecticides and 33% for herbicides and
fungicides. Revenue from the tax is used for
research into the effects of pesticides (25%) and
reducing land taxes for the farmers.
In 1997 the Bichel Committee was set up to
assess the impact of phasing out pesticides from
agriculture. Their report showed that the use of
pesticides could be reduced from a frequency
treatment index (the number of pesticide applications
made to the crop each year) of 2.45 to
Danish Pesticide Action Plans
between 1.4 and 1.7 within a five- to ten-year
period, without serious financial or socio-economic
impacts on farmers. The Second Pesticide
Action Plan, announced in 2000, has the following
goals:
◆ treatment frequency index as low as possible
on treated acreage;
◆ protection of certain areas, including a buffer
zone along targeted watercourses and lakes of
over 100 m 2 ;
◆ an increase in the acreage of organic production;
◆ revision of the pesticide approval scheme.
This would be accomplished by:
◆ increasing advice to farmers on how to reduce
pesticide consumption;
◆ establishing demonstration farms and information
groups;
◆ increasing the use of decision-support and
warning systems for diseases and pests;
◆ introducing targets for use of pesticides in different
crops as a control instrument at farm level;
◆ using set-aside (i.e. taking land out of production)
and increased and improved research programmes
on pesticide pollution.
The plan had a rapid effect, with the frequency
index dropping below 2.0 by 2000. It revealed
to some farmers that they were using too many
applications. Interestingly, many farmers were
using much lower levels than average and still
maintaining profitability. Experiments have
shown that in winter wheat the highest profits
were achieved with a treatment frequency of
only 1.2.
One reason cited for the success of the plan is
that farmers and pesticide organizations were
involved in its development.
Despite the 1998 increase in taxes, prices of
pesticides have increased by only 4% since 1997.
The prices of insecticide, which was subject to
the greatest tax increase, have even fallen by 6%.
The taxes have failed to impact greatly on the
price of pesticides, but due to the drop in crop
prices the relative prices of pesticides have
increased by 50-60% compared to that of corn.
Thus a change in market conditions has probably
had a greater impact on pesticide use than taxation
itself.
son. In Viet Nam 2 million farmers have similarly
reduced their use of pesticides. In Sri Lanka
55,000 farmers have reduced the number of
sprays from three to 0.5 per year. In each case the
yield has been maintained and there are savings
due to lower input costs. In some areas the programmes
have been so successful that it is reported
that 25% of farmers in Indonesia, 20-33% in
Viet Nam’s Mekong Delta and 75% in parts of the
Philippines are growing rice without any pesticides
at all. This provides the opportunity to combine
fish farming with rice growing, providing
additional, valuable protein to farmers.
Organic production
The market for organic food is growing rapidly in
many Northern countries and so is the area under
this form of production although in developed
countries the total area under organic farming is
only around 1% of crop area.
Organic production generally has
very much lower impacts on the
environment than conventional 80
farming, but yields also tend to be
lower when moving from highinput
systems (typically of the
70
60
order of 30%). When converting
from low-input agriculture, as 50
occurs in many Southern countries,
there is either no drop in yield
40
or a slight increase. In both cases 30
the practice is generally more sustainable,
in that there are significantly
lower levels of pollution and
20
10
soil erosion. The current area of
registered organic land is small, but 0
in West Africa it is estimated that
over one-third of agricultural produce
is grown organically. It is also
million ha
estimated that about 60 million hectares is farmed
organically in South and East Africa. The demand
for organic produce is outstripping supply.
Demand for this type of production will probably
determine how the industry will develop.
In many developed countries the cost of transition
is very high and subsidies are needed to
achieve it. Organic production still allows the use
of natural pesticides to control pests and diseases.
It could be argued that some of these pests and diseases
would be rather more environmentally damaging
than the conventional alternatives, so that
care needs to be exercised in their use.
Agriculture can proceed along a number of
routes to provide food and livelihoods to people in
a sustainable way in the future. All of these routes
will be influenced by changes in technology that
will have small or great effects on production. A
number of changes are already being made, with
Figure 3
Global area of transgenic crops
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year
new technologies being used to reduce pesticide
use through precision farming, patch spraying and
new application methods. New chemicals (often
based on natural substances) that are more specific
and less environmentally damaging are coming
on the market and reducing the impact of conventional
pesticide use. New varieties with resistance
to pest and diseases are being bred and adopted by
growers in many parts of the world. Research on
how best to use existing technologies is also
advancing and will lead to improvements in production
levels. Although all these changes will
improve food production, the improvements will
generally be small. Major improvements are only
really likely to come from major changes in technology
such as biotechnology.
Agricultural biotechnology
The benefits of biotechnology are derived from its
potentially large contribution to
gains in productivity and quality.
These may come from increased
yields, reduced use of pesticides
and/or fertilizers, reduced labour
requirements or better nutritional
quality. Ultimately, higher production
should lead to lower
prices and therefore better access
to food for the world’s poor. If the
rural poor can be raised above
current poverty levels, there are
potentially real gains to be made.
Increases in production do not
come without associated risks
and uncertainties, and there are
still many questions left to answer
about genetically modified crops
and other genetically modified
organisms.
UNEP Industry and Environment April – September 2004 ◆ 29