Rating Systems for Pesticide Risk Classification on Different Ecosystems

Finizio, Antonio; Calliera, Maura; Vighi, Marco

doi:10.1006/eesa.2001.2063

Cited by 58 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…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, Calliera & Vighi, 2001; Greitens & Day, 2007; Higley & Wintersteen, 1992; Labite, Butler & Cummins, 2011; Leach & Mumford, 2011; Maud, Edwards-Jones & Quin, 2001; Muhammetoglu, Durmaz & Uslu, 2010; Muhammetoglu & Uslu, 2007; Reus et al, 2002; Reus & Leendertse, 2000; Sande et al, 2011; Stenrod et al, 2008; Surgan, Condon & Cox, 2010; van der Werf, 1996; Vercruysse & Steurbaut, 2002; Yazgan & Tanik, 2005). In addition, EIQs for pesticides continue to be updated on a dedicated web site of the New York State Integrated Pest Management Program, Cornell University ().…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A probabilistic analysis reveals fundamental limitations with the environmental impact quotient and similar systems for rating pesticide risks

Peterson

Schleier

2014

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparing risks among pesticides has substantial utility for decision makers. However, if rating schemes to compare risks are to be used, they must be conceptually and mathematically sound. We address limitations with pesticide risk rating schemes by examining in particular the Environmental Impact Quotient (EIQ) using, for the first time, a probabilistic analytic technique. To demonstrate the consequences of mapping discrete risk ratings to probabilities, adjusted EIQs were calculated for a group of 20 insecticides in four chemical classes. Using Monte Carlo simulation, adjusted EIQs were determined under different hypothetical scenarios by incorporating probability ranges. The analysis revealed that pesticides that have different EIQs, and therefore different putative environmental effects, actually may be no different when incorporating uncertainty. The EIQ equation cannot take into account uncertainty the way that it is structured and provide reliable quotients of pesticide impact. The EIQ also is inconsistent with the accepted notion of risk as a joint probability of toxicity and exposure. Therefore, our results suggest that the EIQ and other similar schemes be discontinued in favor of conceptually sound schemes to estimate risk that rely on proper integration of toxicity and exposure information.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A probabilistic analysis reveals fundamental limitations with the environmental impact quotient and similar systems for rating pesticide risks

Peterson

Schleier

2014

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The calculation conducted in the example can be applied to more complex mixtures, including possibly all pesticides used in a given agricultural área, and can be repeated for each significant emission event (rain events or drift corresponding to application). Moreover, the cumulative risk for all the components of the aquatic community (plants, invertebrates, and fish) can also be estimated by applying suitable risk Índices for the biological community [15]. An example of application and validation of the procedure for the description ofthe time variability of PECs for individual chemicals is reported by Bonzini et al [7].…”

Section: Concentration Additionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Cumulative Environmental Risks: Examples from the EU NoMiracle Project

Pistocchi

Groenwold

Lahr

et al. 2010

Environ Model Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present examples of cumulative chemical risk mapping methods developed within the NoMiracle project. The different examples illustrate the application of the concentration addition (CA) approach to pesticides at different scale, the integration in space of cumulative risks to individual organisms under the CA assumption, and two techniques to (1) intégrate risks using data-driven, parametric statistical methods, and (2) cluster together áreas with similar occurrence of different risk factors, respectively The examples are used to discuss some general issues, particularly on the conventional nature of cumulative risk maps, and may provide some suggestions for the praetiee of cumulative risk mapping.

show abstract

“…Further types are risk indicators/indexes, which are designed on the basis of the information required within environmental risk assessment procedures (see e.g. Finizio et al, 2001). …”

Section: Non-monetary Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing environmental risk in agriculture: a systematic perspective on the potential of quantitative policy-oriented risk valuation

Travisi

Nijkamp

2009

IJETM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper seeks to offer a systematic overview of methods and techniques for environmental quality degradation, with a particular view to the management of agricultural risk, against the background of policy relevance. The paper argues that modern valuation methods from ecological economics can play an important role in advancing transparent policy decisions, but at the same time the paper also warns against unjustified optimism. Consequently, also a systematic review of various caveats in evaluation methods is offered.

show abstract

Rating Systems for Pesticide Risk Classification on Different Ecosystems

Cited by 58 publications

References 4 publications

A probabilistic analysis reveals fundamental limitations with the environmental impact quotient and similar systems for rating pesticide risks

A probabilistic analysis reveals fundamental limitations with the environmental impact quotient and similar systems for rating pesticide risks

Mapping Cumulative Environmental Risks: Examples from the EU NoMiracle Project

Managing environmental risk in agriculture: a systematic perspective on the potential of quantitative policy-oriented risk valuation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About