Political efforts are made in the European Union (EU) to reduce pesticide use and to increase the implementation of integrated pest management (IPM). Within the EU project ENDURE, research priorities on pesticide reduction are defined. Using maize, one of the most important crops in Europe, as a case study, we identified the most serious weeds, arthropod pests, and fungal diseases as well as classes and amounts of pesticides applied. Data for 11 European maize growing regions were collected from databases, publications and expert estimates. Silage maize dominates in northern Europe and grain production in central and southern Europe. Crop rotations range from continuous growing of maize over several years to well-planned rotation systems. Weeds, arthropod pests and fungal diseases cause economic losses in most regions, even though differences exist between northern countries and central and southern Europe. Several weed and arthropod species cause increasing problems, illustrating that the goal of reducing chemical pesticide applications is challenging. Pesticides could potentially be reduced by the choice of varieties including genetically modified hybrids, cultural control including crop rotation, biological control, optimized application techniques for chemicals, and the development of more specific treatments. However, restrictions in the availability of alternative pest control measures, farm organization, and the training and knowledge of farmers need to be overcome before the adoption of environmentally friendly pest control strategies can reduce chemical pesticides in an economically competitive way. The complex of several problems that need to be tackled simultaneously and the link between different control measures demonstrates the need for IPM approaches, where pest control is seen in the context of the cropping system and on a regional scale. Multicriteria J. Appl. Entomol.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Food production causes large environmental impacts. In Switzerland, more than half of the initial potato production is not directly consumed by humans but lost. To analyze the environmental impacts caused by these losses, we conducted a Life Cycle Assessment concerning the demand for nonrenewable energy resources, the global warming potential, human toxicity and ecotoxicity (terrestrial and aquatic). We allocated these environmental impacts at each stage of the Swiss potato supply chain to marketable potatoes and potato losses. Furthermore, this study investigated how potential loss reduction scenarios and various loss treatments (animal feed, biogas, incineration) might affect the total ecological performance of the supply chain. The results showed that potato losses were responsible for 39% of the total terrestrial ecotoxicity, 31% of the total potato supply chain's global warming potential, 31% of its human toxicity, 27% of its aquatic ecotoxicity and 23% of its demand for nonrenewable energy resources. The results indicated in general that environmental benefits due to the loss treatments were bigger than benefits achieved by the loss reduction scenarios. Loss treatments, in particular feeding and fermentation, could reduce the examined impacts, but not generating losses represented a better option, especially at the household stage (the impacts here were 8-42 times as high as the impacts of losses at agricultural production). A combination of loss reduction and loss treatment could overcompensate the environmental impacts caused by potato losses because potatoes may be used to substitute for other goods.

No abstract

The production of food is responsible for major environmental impacts. Bearing this in mind, it is even worse when food is lost rather than consumed. In Switzerland, 46% of all processing potatoes and 53% of all fresh potatoes are lost on their way from field to fork. Our study therefore compares the environmental impacts of losses of fresh potatoes with those of French fries. With the aid of a Life Cycle Assessment, we assessed the impact categories "demand for nonrenewable energy resources", "global warming potential", "human toxicity", "terrestrial ecotoxicity" and "aquatic ecotoxicity". Our results show that 1 kg of potatoes consumed as French fries causes 3-5 times more environmental impacts than the same quantity of fresh potatoes, but also that the proportion of impacts relating to losses is considerably lower for French fries (5%-10% vs. 23%-39%). The great majority of processing potato losses occur before the resource-intensive, emission-rich frying processes and therefore the environmental "backpack" carried by each lost potato is still relatively small. Nonetheless, appropriate loss treatment can substantially reduce the environmental impact of potato losses. In the case of French fries, the frying processes and frying oil are the main "hot spots" of environmental impacts, accounting for a considerably higher proportion of damage than potato losses; it is therefore also useful to look at these processes.

Potatoes are one of the commodities with the highest loss shares along the entire supply chain. In the present study, we analyzed six potential loss reduction scenarios concerning their environmental-socio-economic sustainability compared with the current situation by using the "SustainOS" methodology. For this purpose, life cycle assessments, full-cost calculations and an online consumer survey were conducted. Environmental improvements through loss reduction were rather small and did not cross limits of significance, but the socio-economic performance of the entire supply chain can be improved considerably. Pearson correlation coefficients and linear regression analyses were used to predict the influence of specific subjective items like the intention to avoid food loss, knowledge related to food loss and consumers' price sensitivity on the assigned preference. Results show that perceived risks, perceived inconvenience and the general acceptance of loss-reducing instruments influence consumers' preferences. Altogether, only three out of six tested scenarios seem realistic: selling unwashed potatoes in a lightproof box, selling unpacked potatoes, and improved quality sorting at farms. For two of the other scenarios, consumers significantly indicated their refusal even if losses decreased considerably, whereas the sixth scenario was unfavorable from a socio-economic perspective.