A Review and Evaluation of Plant Protection Product Ranking Tools Used in Agriculture

A dual indicator set to help farms achieve more sustainable crop protection

“…Many such pesticide impact assessment systems (PIASs) have been developed that take various amounts of environmental compartments or human and ecosystem effects into account 18, 21, 22. The new EU Directive also refers to using this type of indicator to evaluate progress towards sustainable pesticide use 2…”

“…Indicators are obviously needed to measure whether the requirements for SCP are met at farm level. The literature contains two main general types of indicator: (1) use indicators, such as volume of active ingredient used18 or frequency (the number of times a plot is treated within a year),5, 19 and (2) risk indicators [pesticide impact assessment systems (PIASs)] 18, 20–22. An overview of indicator types is given by Barzman and Dachbrodt‐Saaydeh 23…”

Peer Review #2 of "A probabilistic analysis reveals fundamental limitations with the environmental impact quotient and similar systems for rating pesticide risks (v0.1)"

“…The most influential scheme is arguably the Environmental Impact Quotient (EIQ) by Kovach et al (1992). Since the introduction of the EIQ, numerous researchers have evaluated it or adapted it for their own risk rating schemes, or both (Cross & Edwards-Jones 2011;Finizio et al 2001;Greitens & Day 2007;Higley & Wintersteen 1992;Labite et al 2011;Leach & Mumford 2011;Maud et al 2001;Muhammetoglu et al 2010;Muhammetoglu & Uslu 2007;Reus et al 2002;Reus & Leendertse 2000;Sande et al 2011;Stenrod et al 2008;Surgan et al 2010;van der Werf 1996;Vercruysse & Steurbaut 2002;Yazgan & Tanik 2005). In addition, EIQ's for pesticides continue to be updated on a dedicated web site of the New York State Integrated Pest Management Program, Cornell University (www.nysipm.cornell.edu/publications/eiq/).…”

Pesticide hazard trends in orchard fruit production in Great Britain from 1992 to 2008: a time‐series analysis

“…A number of these tools go beyond evaluations of pesticide usage alone and incorporate measures of a substance's toxicological properties and their impact on a diverse range of non‐target organisms such as humans, birds, fish, bees and other beneficial organisms . While there is considerable variability between the rankings provided by such ‘risk indexes’ (pesticide ‘risk indexes’ reported in the literature are often in fact indexes of the ‘consequences of hazard’, as they omit estimates of probability of an event or its magnitude), they do allow an evaluation of pesticide hazard either between crops or as time‐series trends . Such indexes can also be deployed to evaluate the relative impact of policy initiatives such as the replacing of Directive 91/414 with regulation (EC) No.…”

“…5,6 While there is considerable variability between the rankings provided by such 'risk indexes' (pesticide 'risk indexes' reported in the literature are often in fact indexes of the 'consequences of hazard', as they omit estimates of probability of an event or its magnitude 7,8 ), they do allow an evaluation of pesticide hazard either between crops or as time-series trends. 9,10 Such indexes can also be deployed to evaluate the relative impact of policy initiatives such as the replacing of Directive 91/414 with regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009, or to supplement the monitoring protocols of the Voluntary Initiative (see http://www.voluntaryinitiative.org.uk).…”