Under- and over-use of pesticides: An international analysis

Ghimire, Narishwar; Woodward, Richard T.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.02.003

Cited by 76 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The concern surrounding the potential impact of pesticides, particularly insecticides, on the honey bee and its products and ecological services is justifiable, not only because of the importance of such products and services but also because of the increased demand for pollinators in current agricultural production . High‐yield agricultural systems and middle‐to‐high‐income countries continue the heavy use of pesticides, with evidence of overuse reflected in average pesticide amounts: above 2.0 kg ha −1 in the United States, Canada and several European countries, and over 10 kg ha −1 in countries such as Brazil and China, among others . Among agricultural pesticides, insecticides are also without a noticeable reduction in use, with some having an actual increase in use, even under the intense adoption of genetically modified crops .…”

Section: Public Perception Of Honey Bee Decline and Pest Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pesticides and reduced-risk insecticides, native bees and pantropical stingless bees: pitfalls and perspectives

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although invertebrates generally have a low public profile, the honey bee, Apis mellifera L., is a flagship species whose popularity likely derives from the products it provides and its perceived ecological services. Therefore, the raging debate regarding honey bee decline has surpassed the realm of beekeepers, academia, industry and regulatory agencies and now also encompasses non-governmental agencies, media, fiction writers and the general public. The early interest and concern about honey bee colony collapse disorder (CCD) soon shifted to the bigger issue of pollinator decline, with a focus on the potential involvement of pesticides in such a phenomenon. Pesticides were previously recognised as the potential culprits of the reported declines, particularly the neonicotinoid insecticides owing to their widespread and peculiar use in agriculture. However, the evidence for the potential pivotal role of these neonicotinoids in honey bee decline remains a matter of debate, with an increased recognition of the multifactorial nature of the problem and the lack of a direct association between the noted decline and neonicotinoid use. The focus on the decline of honey bee populations subsequently spread to other species, and bumblebees became another matter of concern, particularly in Europe and the United States. Other bee species, ones that are particularly important in other regions of the world, remain the object of little concern (unjustifiably so). Furthermore, the continuous focus on neonicotinoids is also in need of revision, as the current evidence suggests that a broad spectrum of compounds deserve attention. Here we address both shortcomings.

show abstract

Section: Public Perception Of Honey Bee Decline and Pest Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pesticides and reduced-risk insecticides, native bees and pantropical stingless bees: pitfalls and perspectives

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is generally recognized (or assumed) that integrated pest management practices have economic, social, and environmental benefits for those who implement these practices. At the same time, pesticide overuse is broadly claimed in the literature, especially in modern, mechanized agricultural systems in wealthy countries (21). The cost of overuse of pesticides is shared collectively by society in the form of pesticide resistance, chronic and acute health problems for farm workers and consumers, environmental contamination, impacts on nontarget organisms, and regulatory costs to governments (56).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Concepts of Sustainability, Motivations for Pest Management Approaches, and Implications for Communicating Change

Sherman

Gent

2014

Plant Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact and relevance are valued by both plant pathologists and the supporters of research and extension. Impact has been characterized as the “So what?” of research results, and in applied research in agriculture typically involves some change in human behavior. This might involve, for instance, avoidance of broad spectrum pesticides, use of economic thresholds, or adoption of a new cultural practice in disease management. Changes in human behavior often are slow and difficult, even when the potential benefits of change seem clear. Research and extension personnel working with farmers have discussed for decades the apparent slow pace of adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) and other less-pesticide-intensive management practices. The reasons why change is slow are numerous, but one aspect that warrants consideration is how changes in farm practices are communicated to farmers. Effectively communicating changes in pest management practices at the farm level requires a system of research and extension management that differs from that to which most biological scientists are accustomed. What is the motivation for farmers to deviate from historical practices? How persuasive are concepts of environmental sustainability, integrated pest management, risk management, and economic gain in communicating the needs for change? In addressing these questions, it is useful to understand some of the basic determinants of farmers' decision processes and motivations to adopt practices. This article discusses these issues.

show abstract

“…The scatter and residues from these pesticides can cause serious pollution (Ghimire and Woodward 2013) and great harm (Wang et al 2013), including many diseases to humans (Jaga and Dharmani 2005;Koutros et al 2010) Pesticides can affect human and animal genome epigenetic status (Collotta et al 2013) thereby causing high incidences of a variety of cancers (Zhang et al 2012a, b;Weichenthal et al 2010). Some exogenous chemicals can cause methylation changes in plant genomic DNA (Karan 2012;Tyunin et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Gene chip analysis of Arabidopsis thaliana genomic DNA methylation and gene expression in response to carbendazim

Wang

2015

Biotechnol Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Under- and over-use of pesticides: An international analysis

Cited by 76 publications

References 38 publications

Pesticides and reduced-risk insecticides, native bees and pantropical stingless bees: pitfalls and perspectives

Pesticides and reduced-risk insecticides, native bees and pantropical stingless bees: pitfalls and perspectives

Concepts of Sustainability, Motivations for Pest Management Approaches, and Implications for Communicating Change

Gene chip analysis of Arabidopsis thaliana genomic DNA methylation and gene expression in response to carbendazim

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About