Summary
An analysis of the regulations of herbicide use for weed control in non‐agricultural/urban amenity areas, including actual pesticide use, was carried out as a joint survey of seven European countries: Denmark, Finland, Germany, Latvia, the Netherlands, Sweden and United Kingdom. Herbicides constitute the major part of the pesticides used in urban amenity areas. Herbicide use on hard surfaces is the largest in terms of volume and potential contamination of surface and groundwater. The aim of the study was to investigate the differences in political interest and public debate on the ‘use of pesticides in public urban amenity areas’, regulations within each country at national, regional and local levels, possible use of alternative weed control methods and the amounts of pesticides used on urban amenity areas. A comparative analysis revealed major differences in political interest, regulations and availability of statistics on pesticide use. Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany have, or have had, a strong public and political interest for reducing the use of herbicides to control weeds in urban amenity areas and also have very strict regulations. The UK is currently undergoing a period of increasing awareness and strengthening regulation, while Latvia and Finland do not have specific regulations for weed control in urban amenity areas or on hard surfaces. Statistics on pesticide/herbicide use on urban amenity areas were only available in Denmark and the Netherlands. Developing this kind of information base reveals the differences in herbicide use, regulations and policies in European countries and may enhance the transfer of knowledge on sustainable weed control across countries.
The non-agricultural use of pesticides in The Netherlands declined in the period 1986-2001 from 127000 to 40000 kg AI per annum. However use on pavements rose from 23% to 50% of the total non-agricultural use. To diminish the dependency on herbicides, both preventive and curative non-chemical weed control methods have been examined. In the future both mechanical and thermal methods can be improved. On a flat pavement mechanical methods are preferred because they are more effective. Two approaches are used by municipalities to lower the environmental impact of the use of herbicides on pavements. The first is to phase out the use of chemicals on hard surfaces and the second is the integrated approach in which herbicides are not prohibited, but used only on places and at times when the risk of run-off is below a mutually accepted level. Both approaches can be effective.
The Steenbreek program is a private Dutch program which aims to involve citizens, municipalities and other stakeholders in replacing pavement with vegetation in private gardens. The Dutch approach is characterized by minimal governmental incentives or policy, which leaves a niche for private initiatives like Steenbreek, that mainly work on behavioural change. The aim of this paper is to build a model based on theory that can be used to improve and better evaluate depaving actions that are based on behavioural change. We tested this garden greening behaviour model in the Steenbreek program. The main result is that the model provides an understanding of the ‘how and why’ of the Steenbreek initiatives. Based on this we are able to provide recommendations for the improvement of future initiatives. Steenbreek covers a wide range of projects that together, in very different ways, take into account elements of the theoretical framework; either more on information factors, or on supporting factors, sometimes taking all elements together in a single action. This focus is sometimes understandable when just one element is needed (e.g., support), sometimes more elements could be taken into account to be more effective. If a certain element of the framework is lacking, the change of behaviour will not (or will only partly) take place. The model also gives insight into a more specific approach aimed at the people most susceptible to changing their behaviour, which would make actions more effective.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.