Peer-reviewed articles 17,970 +


Title: EUROPEAN UNION FARM TO FORK STRATEGY: PESTICIDE USE REDUCTION POSSIBILITIES
EUROPEAN UNION FARM TO FORK STRATEGY: PESTICIDE USE REDUCTION POSSIBILITIES

PlumX Article Metrics by Elsevier
Aija Pilvere; Irina Pilvere; Ilze Upite; Aleksejs Nipers
10.5593/sgem2024/5.1/s21.65
10.5593/sgem2024/5.1
1314-2704
978-619-7603-72-9
English
24
5.1
•    Prof. DSc. Oleksandr Trofymchuk, UKRAINE 
•    Prof. Dr. hab. oec. Baiba Rivza, LATVIA
Environmental Economics
Pesticides are traditionally used in agricultural production to protect crops against pests and diseases. However, there is growing public concern about the negative impacts of pesticides on human health and the environment. Therefore, one of the policy documents of the European Green Deal, which plays an important role in long-term agricultural development and environment-friendly management, is the Farm to Fork Strategy, which requires reducing pesticide use by 50% in the European Union (EU) by 2030. Therefore, the present research aims to examine trends in pesticide use in EU Member States (MS) to identify the potential impact of the target set by the Farm to Fork Strategy, i.e. to reduce pesticide use by 50%, on crop output value. The research applied the monographic method, statistical data analysis and scenario development methods. The research found that in 2021, according to Eurostat, the sales of pesticides in the EU totalled 356.5 thou. tonnes, with Spain, France, Italy and Germany accounting for 69% of the total. In 2016-2021, the intensity of pesticide use per ha UAA varied from 0.6 kg in Ireland and Sweden to almost 6 kg in the Netherlands. Similar differences in pesticide sales per ha arable land and crop output value were observed in EU MS. The research designed scenarios for identifying the potential impact of a 50% reduction in pesticide use on crop output value, and it was found that this would probably lead to a significant decrease in crop output value by 47-55% compared with 2021, depending on the scenario implemented, and the farmers will need to repl
[1] European Commission. A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system, Brussels,2020, 23 p.
[2] Silva, V., Yang, X., Fleskens, L., Ritsema, C.J., Geissen, V. Environmental and human health at risk – Scenarios to achieve the Farm to Fork 50% pesticide reduction goals. Environment International, Vol.165, 2022, 107296. Doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107296.
[3] Pimentel, D., McLaughlin, L., Zepp, A., Lakitan, B., Kraus, T., Kleinman, P., Vancini, F., Roach, W.J., Graap, E., Keeton, W.S., Selig, G. Environmental and economic effects of reducing pesticide sale in agriculture (1993) Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 46 (1-4), pp. 273-288. Doi: 10.1016/0167-8809(93)90030-S
[4] Tataridas, A., Kanatas, P., Chatzigeorgiou, A., Zannopoulos, S., Travlos, I. Sustainable Crop and Weed Management in the Era of the EU Green Deal: A Survival Guide. Agronomy 2022, 12, 589. Doi:10.3390/agronomy12030589.
[5] Schneider, K., Barreiro-Hurle, J., Rodriguez-Cerezo, E. Pesticide reduction amidst food and feed security concerns in Europe. Nat Food 4, 2023, pp.746–750. Doi:10.1038/s43016-023-00834-6.
[6] Pistocchi, A., Dorati, C., Galimberti, F., Udias, A., Bopp, S., D’Andrimont, R., Catarino, R., Schaefer, R.B. A screening study of the spatial distribution and cumulative toxicity of agricultural pesticides in the European Union’s waters. Front. Environ. Sci., vol. 11, 2023, 1101316. Doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2023.1101316.
[7] Eurostat. Pesticide sales [aei_fm_salpest09$defaultview] (Accessed on 11 January 2024).
[8] Eurostat. Utilised agricultural area by categories [tag00025]. (Accessed on 28 January 2024).
[9] Eurostat. Economic accounts for agriculture - values at current prices [aact_eaa01$defaultview]. (Accessed on 28 January 2024).
[10] Triantafyllidis, V., Mavroeidis, A.; Kosma, C., Karabagias, I., Zotos, A., Kehayias, G., Beslemes, D., Roussis, I., Bilalis, D., Economou, G., Kakabouki, I. Herbicide Sale in the Era of Farm to Fork: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Future Implications. Water Air Soil Pollut 2023, 234, 94. Doi: 10.1007/s11270-023-06125-x.
[11] Jess, S., Matthews, D.I., Murchie, A.K., Lavery, M.K. Pesticide Sale in Northern Ireland’s Arable Crops from 1992–2016 and Implications for Future Policy Development. Agriculture, vol. 8, 2018, 123. Doi:10.3390/agriculture8080123.
[12] Barzman, M., Barberi, P., Birch, A.N.E., Boonekamp, P., Dachbrodt-Saaydeh, S., Graf, B., Hommel, B., Jensen, J.E., Kiss, J., Kudsk, P., Lamichhane, J. R., Messean, A., Moonen, A.C., Ratnadass, A., Ricci, P., Sarah, J.L., Sattin, M. Eight principles of integrated pest management. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, vol. 35 (4), 2015, pp.1199-1215. Doi: 10.1007/s13593-015-0327-9.
[13] Sane, M., Hajek, M., Nwaogu, C., Purwestri, R.C. Subsidy as An Economic Instrument for Environmental Protection: A Case of Global Fertilizer Sale. Sustainability, vol. 13, 2021, 9408. Doi: 10.3390/su13169408.
[14] Vos, R.; Martin, W.; Resnick, D. Repurposing agricultural support: Creating food systems incentives to address climate change. 2022 Global Food Policy Report: Climate Change and Food Systems Chapter 2, 2022, pp.16-27. Washington, DC: IFPRI. Doi: 10.2499/9780896294257_02.
[15] Pergner, I., Lippert, C. On the effects that motivate pesticide sale in perspective of designing a cropping system without pesticides but with mineral fertilizer—a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev., vol. 43, 2023, 24. Doi: 10.1007/s13593-023-00877-w.
[16] Mohring, N., Ingold, K., Kudsk, P., Martin-Laurent, F., Niggli, U., Siegrist, M., Studer, B., Walter, A., Finger, R. Pathways for advancing pesticide policies. Nature food, vol.1(9), 2020, pp.535-540. Doi: 10. 1038/s43016-020-00141-4.
[17] Rajmis, S., Karpinski, I., Pohl, J. P., Herrmann, M., Kehlenbeck, H. Economic potential of site-specific pesticide application scenarios with direct injection and automatic application assistant in northern Germany. Precision Agriculture, 2022, p.1-26. Doi: 10.1007/s11119-022-09888-1.
[18] Nipers A., Pilvere I., Upite I., Krievina A., Pilvere A., When pesticide reduction objectives meet business as usual: Possible impacts on the crop sector in Latvia, Resources, Environment and Sustainability, Vol. 15, 2024. Doi: 10.1016/j.resenv.2023.100145.
conference
https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2024/5.1/s21.65
Download PDF
Proceedings of 24th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2024
24th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2024, 1 - 7 July, 2024
Proceedings Paper
STEF92 Technology
International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM
SWS Scholarly Society; Acad Sci Czech Republ; Latvian Acad Sci; Polish Acad Sci; Russian Acad Sci; Serbian Acad Sci and Arts; Natl Acad Sci Ukraine; Natl Acad Sci Armenia; Sci Council Japan; European Acad Sci, Arts and Letters; Acad Fine Arts Zagreb Croatia; Croatian Acad Sci and Arts; Acad Sci Moldova; Montenegrin Acad Sci and Arts; Georgian Acad Sci; Acad Fine Arts and Design Bratislava; Russian Acad Arts; Turkish Acad Sci.
521-528
1 - 7 July, 2024
website
10013
pesticide sale, intensity, crop value, reduction.

25th SGEM International Conference on Earth & Planetary Sciences


International GeoConference SGEM2025
27 June - 6 July, 2025 / Albena, Bulgaria

Read More		   

SGEM Vienna GREEN "Green Science for Green Life"


Extended Scientific Sessions SGEM Vienna GREEN
3 -6 December, 2025 / Vienna, Austria

Read More
   

A scientific platform for Art-Inspired Scientists!


The Magical World Where Science meets Art
Vienna, Austria

Read More