IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02619674.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Costs, quantity and toxicity: Comparison of pesticide indicators collected from FADN farms in four EU-countries

Author

Listed:
  • Sandra Uthes

    (ZALF - Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung = Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research)

  • Ines Heyer

    (ZALF - Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung = Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research)

  • Annemarie Kaiser

    (ZALF - Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung = Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research)

  • Peter Zander

    (ZALF - Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung = Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research)

  • Christian Bockstaller

    (LAE-Colmar - Laboratoire Agronomie et Environnement - Antenne Colmar - LAE - Laboratoire Agronomie et Environnement - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - UL - Université de Lorraine)

  • Yann Desjeux

    (SMART-LERECO - Structures et Marché Agricoles, Ressources et Territoires - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - AGROCAMPUS OUEST)

  • Szilárd Keszthelyi

    (VUZE - Research Institute of Agricultural Economics)

  • Eszter Kis-Csatári

    (VUZE - Research Institute of Agricultural Economics)

  • Andras Molnar

    (VUZE - Research Institute of Agricultural Economics)

  • Wioletta Wrzaszcz

    (Agricultural and Food Economics)

  • Monika Juchniewicz

    (Agricultural and Food Economics)

Abstract

There is a growing demand in the last years for farm-level sustainability data reflected in various initiatives from farmers, science and food industries. An alternative to creating new tools and indicator assessment frameworks is to further develop existing farm monitoring systems, such as the EU-wide Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN), towards inclusion of sustainability-related data. This article reports on a study carried out within the EU-project FLINT comparing indicators for pesticide costs, application quantity and pesticide toxicity calculated for 416 farms in four EU countries (France, Germany, Hungary, Poland). The farm sample was a non-representative subsample of the national FADN samples in these countries. Major focus of the comparison was to analyse the suitability of the indicators for implementation in a large so-far primarily economic farm-level monitoring system, such as the FADN. The FADN currently includes farm-level expenditure for crop protection as the only indicator with reference to pesticides. We show that it is possible to extend the current FADN with reasonable effort towards indicators for pesticide application quantity (pesticide usage, treatment index) and pesticide toxicity (here exemplarily used: lethal dose 50 in rats), while the data demands of more elaborated indicators could not be met with the current system. The correlation between indicators, reflecting the extent to which indicators come to the same conclusion, was small between pesticide costs and pesticide usage or toxicity, thus the use of pesticide costs as an ecological indicator, as was done in other studies, cannot be recommended. A combined consideration in the FADN system of pesticide quantity and toxicity, which showed moderate correlation, could be a suitable approach instead.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandra Uthes & Ines Heyer & Annemarie Kaiser & Peter Zander & Christian Bockstaller & Yann Desjeux & Szilárd Keszthelyi & Eszter Kis-Csatári & Andras Molnar & Wioletta Wrzaszcz & Monika Juchniewicz, 2019. "Costs, quantity and toxicity: Comparison of pesticide indicators collected from FADN farms in four EU-countries," Post-Print hal-02619674, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02619674
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.05.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Keith B. Matthews & Ansel Renner & Kirsty L. Blackstock & Kerry A. Waylen & Dave G. Miller & Doug H. Wardell-Johnson & Alba Juarez-Bourke & Juan Cadillo-Benalcazar & Joep F. Schyns & Mario Giampietro, 2021. "Old Wine in New Bottles: Exploiting Data from the EU’s Farm Accountancy Data Network for Pan-EU Sustainability Assessments of Agricultural Production Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-26, September.
    2. Paulus, Anne & Hagemann, Nina & Baaken, Marieke C. & Roilo, Stephanie & Alarcón-Segura, Viviana & Cord, Anna F. & Beckmann, Michael, 2022. "Landscape context and farm characteristics are key to farmers' adoption of agri-environmental schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Ileana Iocola & Frederique Angevin & Christian Bockstaller & Rui Catarino & Michael Curran & Antoine Messéan & Christian Schader & Didier Stilmant & Florence Van Stappen & Paul Vanhove & Hauke Ahneman, 2020. "An Actor-Oriented Multi-Criteria Assessment Framework to Support a Transition towards Sustainable Agricultural Systems Based on Crop Diversification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-29, July.
    4. Luca Turchetti & Nadia Gastaldin & Sonia Marongiu, 2021. "Enhancing the Italian FADN for sustainability assessment: The state of art and perspectives," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 23(3), pages 1-21.
    5. Thierno Bocar Diop & Lionel Védrine, 2025. "Did crop diversity criterion from CAP green payments affect both economic and environmental farm performances? Quasi-experimental evidence from France," Post-Print hal-04739921, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02619674. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.