Report from the Sub-committee on Production, Economics and Employment. 2. Description of pesticide consumption in the agricultural sector2.1 Introduction 2.1 Introduction The purpose of this chapter This chapter gives a brief outline of pesticide consumption in the agricultural sector and its composition, and of pesticide usage in different types of production and types of farm. The description forms the basis for the fundamental considerations concerning regulation of pesticide consumption given in chapter 3 and for the analyses in the subsequent chapters of the economic consequences of restrictions on the use of pesticides in agriculture. Pesticides have increased productivity ...and reduced the need for manual labour The introduction of pesticides in agriculture has helped to increase productivity and has thus contributed to steadily rising production since the Second World War. The use of fungicides and insecticides has led to increased yields in arable farming, and the use of herbicides has reduced the need for manual labour. In addition, pesticides make it possible to avoid losses during storage of the products. Pesticides thus have many applications that affect the production and consumption of the means of production in a number of ways. Pesticides cover a multitude of products. They are classified as herbicides, fungicides, insecticides and growth regulators. In addition, there are chemical agents for disinfecting soil in greenhouses and insecticides for controlling flies and pests in stables, cowsheds, etc. and storage facilities. These classes are subdivided into products with specific properties for specific uses. In the present context, the analysis focuses on the main classification of pesticides. The agricultural sector accounts for 80 per cent of consumption Agricultural consumption of pesticides is estimated to account for 80 per cent of total consumption in Denmark (Danish Environmental Protection Agency, 1998a). Besides this usage, pesticides are used for vacuum-impregnation of timber, protection of wool against moth and the carpet beetle, combating flies, ants and other vermin in the home, rat control, control of growth of algae, etc., and there are agents for preventing damage by game in forests and orchards. These applications are not dealt with in this analysis. In this report, the Sub-committee on Production, Economics and Employment describes the development and composition of pesticide consumption in the agricultural sector and examines the use of pesticides at different types of farm with a view to determining the significance of the form of farming for the scope and nature of pesticide consumption. The sub-committee has also analysed the significance of the structure of the agricultural sector for pesticide consumption and, lastly, the expenditure on chemicals in market gardening. 2.2 Pesticide consumption in the agricultural sector Farmers began using pesticides after the Second World War. They used them initially for prevention and control of pests in the most important crops. However, with the development of new chemical agents and improved spraying equipment, mechanical and manual weed control was increasingly replaced by chemical control, and chemical control of fungal diseases in crops became increasingly common. Later, chemical regulation of plant growth (e.g. shortening the stems of cereals) gained a footing. Upswing in consumption in the 1950s The real upswing in the use of pesticides began in the 1950s. From the middle of that decade to the beginning of the 1970s, pesticide consumption rose fivefold, reaching a level corresponding to around 6.7 million kg active ingredient in 1973. Following a fall in the mid-1970s, consumption then rose again to a new high (7.5 mill. kg active ingredient) in 1982/83 and thereafter fell steadily to 3.7 mill. kg in 1997. Altogether, consumption has thus halved since the beginning of the 1980s. More efficcacious agents However, account must be taken of the fact that the reduction in the consumption of active ingredient has been accompanied by an increase in the efficacy of the agents, which means that there has actually only been a small reduction in pesticide consumption. Considerable fall in consumption since the beginning of the 1980s.. From and including 1981, statistics have been kept of the composition of pesticide consumption (Figure 2.1). It will be seen from this figure, that herbicide consumption fell by about 40 per cent from 1983 to 1997, although with considerable fluctuations from year to year. Fungicide consumption peaked in 1984 and then fell continuously, ending in 1997 at 35 per cent of the 1984 level. Insecticide consumption fell by 80 per cent in the period shown, while consumption of growth regulators (not shown in the figure) rose from just under 100 tonnes in 1981 to 400 tonnes in 1984 and then, in the period to 1997, fell to approximately the level at the beginning of the 1980s. The fluctuations in consumption in 1995-96 were due to hoarding in 1995 in connection with the increase in the tax on pesticides in 1996. Figure 2.1 Look here! … but only slightly declining treatment frequency index The corresponding statistics for treatment frequency show that the number of applications per ha has varied between 2.5 and 3.5 per year since the beginning of the 1980s, with a downward trend towards the end of the period. (Figure 2.2). In 1995-1996, the treatment frequency index was affected by the above-mentioned hoarding, see the comment concerning Figure 2.2. Herbicide applications lay in the interval 1-1.7 per year, with a slightly rising trend until 1996, when consumption fell. Treatment with fungicides fluctuated between 1.2 and 0.3 per year, with a declining trend. The treatment frequency index for growth regulators has averaged 0.1, with a downward trend since the mid-1980s. Goal only partially achieved It must thus be concluded that the government’s pesticide policy goal of a 50 per cent reduction in pesticide consumption from 1983-85 to 1997 has been achieved, but not the goal of the same reduction in the treatment frequency index. As described below, one reason for the latter is a major change in land use from spring cereals to winter cereals, which has resulted in an increase in treatment with pesticides. Figure 2.2 Look here! Reasons for change in consumption Several factors are implicated in the described development of pesticide consumption. The rising trend up to the beginning of the 1980s must be attributed to more widespread use of chemical prevention and control in practice. The typical course of events when new technology is introduced is that the most enterprising producers use the technology first. Use of the technology then spreads to other producers, first at an increasing rate and then at a decreasing rate as the technology becomes common practice. Table 2.1 below, showing the expenditure on pesticide treatment measured in DKK per ha, gives a picture of the effect of pesticide usage on production costs in farming. The farm accounts statistics do not offer the possibility of differentiating between different classes of pesticides, i.e. the differences that are observed between crops and types of farm, are due partly to differences in the composition of the consumption and partly to differences in the price of pesticides. However, the figures give a picture of the distribution of the consumption and, at the same time, show the total spending on pesticides in the different forms of production and types of farming. Big variation in consumption between crops As shown in Table 2.1, the expenditure on pesticides is far greater in the production of beets and potatoes than in the production of cereals and grass. Almost no pesticides are used for grass. It will also be seen that pesticide consumption is far higher in winter cereals than in spring cereals. Measured in relation to total production costs, pesticide consumption is particularly high in sugar beets for sugar production, which must primarily be attributed to the use of costly herbicides. The differences indicated mean that changes in the crop composition will, over time, affect total pesticide consumption. Table 2.1
Note: The figures concern expenditure on chemicals, most of which are pesticides. ... Change in land use As shown in Figure 2.3, there has been a substantial switch from production of barley (mainly spring barley) to wheat since the beginning of the 1970s, accompanied by a fall in the acreage with grass and greenfeed up to the beginning of the 1990s. This has in itself increased the need to use pesticides. Working in the same direction is a growing acreage with seed for sowing and industrial use (rape), while a gradual fall in the acreage with root crops for fodder is working in the opposite direction. The trend in the 1990s has been affected particularly by the introduction of compulsory set-aside and a falling acreage with industrial seed, which has reduced pesticide consumption.1 It should be noted that set-aside does not affect the treatment frequency figures because they have been calculated without set-aside .… explained in part by the EU’s agricultural policy The changes in land use in recent years must be attributed particularly to the 1992 reform of the EU agricultural policy, which implied a reduction in the price of cereals, oil seed and rape, among other crops, the introduction of compensation payment for the crops in question and a requirement concerning compulsory set-aside. The fall in the acreage with seed for sowing and industrial use is a direct consequence of this change, which means that rape is now produced at world market prices. As will be explained in connection with the analyses, a reduction of farm product prices has a significant effect on the intensity of production and the consumption of pesticides in arable farming. Figure 2.3 Look here! Acreage with fodder beet is falling The acreage with grass and greenfeed comprises both set-aside acreage, permanent grass and – after 1992 – also set-aside laid to grass.2 The reduction in root crops is due mainly to a fall in acreage from more than 200,000 ha in 1970 to 37,000 ha in 1997, corresponding to a 5 per cent fall per year. This big fall must be attributed to production of fodder beet being cost-intensive compared with production of grass and greenfeed. However, the trend has also been affected by the fact that yields have increased over time, which, combined with quota limitation of milk production in the EU, has reduced the need for green-fodder acreage. Switch from spring to winter cereals One reason for the switch from spring barley to winter wheat is that winter wheat generally produces a higher yield than spring cereals and has therefore been an attractive alternative to spring cereals. In addition, the possibility of controlling couch grass chemically in crops has reduced the need for soil preparation in the autumn. The appearance of more efficacious herbicides, fungicides and insecticides may also have contributed to this development. Significance of the structure of farming for pesticide consumption Larger consumption at full-time farms The above-mentioned differences between crops with respect to pesticide treatment are reflected in the consumption of pesticides in the different types of farming. The general picture is that full-time farms have a higher consumption than part-time farms. As shown in Table 2.2, full-time arable farms have the largest consumption and also the highest treatment frequency index. That is because arable farmers concentrate mainly on production of cash crops (winter cereals, rape and sugar beet), which, as mentioned, have a relatively high consumption of pesticides. Table 2.2
1 The treatment frequency index is calculated by dividing the consumption of active ingredient by the recommended dose per ha.Note: The table is based on the Danish Institute of Agricultural and Fishery Economics’ accounts statistics for the 1996/97 operating year, supplemented by information on the composition of the pesticide consumption. The material is based on 607 farms selected from around 2,000 farms on which the statistic are based. Dairy farmers and pig farmers use fewer pesti-cides than arable farmers Dairy farms and pig farms have a somewhat lower consumption of pesticides and a lower treatment frequency index. In the case of dairy farms, it is particularly in the production of fodder beet that treatment with pesticides is needed, but with the fodder-beet acreage falling and greater concentration on wholecrop, it is estimated that the use of pesticides is diminishing. The lower pesticide consumption at pig farms is due particularly to a low production of root crops (fodder beet and sugar beet for industrial use) and to the fact that pig farmers grow more spring cereals and rape than arable farmers. The said differences in land use must also be seen in relation to the fact that livestock production is concentrated on lighter soils and that the type of soil in itself affects land use. The above-mentioned analyses are based on a questionnaire-based survey of a representative selection of farmers. Danmarks Statistik’s treatment frequency figures in the different forms of farming show approximately the same picture, in that the treatment frequency at arable farms in 1994 was 2.8 standard doses per ha compared with 2.0 at dairy farms and 2.8 at pig farms (Danmarks Statistik, 1995). The latter figures are the averages for all farms. As indicated above, pesticide consumption at part-time farms is considerably lower than at full-time farms. This must be attributed in part to different cultural practices. Full-time farmers are very dependent on their earnings in farming and their production is therefore more efficient than that of part-time farmers, who base their earnings more on work in other occupations. However, it should be noted that the averages shown cover a considerable variation between farms and that there are full-time farms with a low pesticide consumption, just as there are part-time farms with a high consumption. Organic farming has not been included in the analysis. Difference between size groups When a breakdown of full-time farms by size is carried out, it is found that pesticide consumption per ha increases with the size of the farm (Figure 2.4). Here, farm size is expressed by the European size unit (ESU), which is based on a calculated standard gross margin per farm that takes account of the size of any livestock production. A breakdown of part-time farms by size reveals the same picture. … is explained by different land use The reasons for the above-mentioned differences include different land use in the size groups, with the type of soil also playing a role. Large arable farms have a relatively larger acreage with beets and potatoes than small ones (Table 2.3), which means higher pesticide consumption. In the case of dairy farms, the proportion of winter-cereal acreage increases with farm size, while the proportion with spring cereals and grass falls, which also results in higher pesticide consumption. In the case of pig farms, a considerably smaller proportion of the acreage is used for cereals at large farms than at small ones and, at the same time, the proportion used for beets and potatoes increases with the size of the farm, with a consequently higher consumption of pesticides. Figure 2.4 Look here! There are thus several factors that influence pesticide consumption, but the principal factor is the land use. In an analysis of the significance of the structure of farming for pesticide consumption, Schou (1998b, p. 30) states that the differences in pesticide consumption between the types of farm and size groups can, in principle, be attributed to two factors: either differences in the individual crops (e.g. that winter wheat is sprayed more intensively at an arable farm than at a dairy farm) or differences in crop composition. Both factors undoubtedly affect pesticide consumption. Schou also states that pesticide consumption seems to show a falling tendency from east to west in Denmark, which must be attributed to the fact that there are more dairy farms and pig farms in the western part of the country than in the eastern part. Table 2.3
See note to table 2 and the text. Composition of pesticide consumption Consumption and ... The composition of the pesticide consumption varies with the crops. As shown in Figure 2.5, herbicide consumption is highest in beets and lowest in rape and spring barley. In maize, largely only herbicides are used. Fungicides are used particularly in cereals and peas, and insecticides in rape and beets, while growth regulators are used in rye, and winter wheat and in seed production. The analysis concerns the 1997 harvest and thus includes pesticide consumption from autumn 1996 to the 1997 harvest. Potatoes are not included in the figure because consumption in the harvest year in question was affected by a very severe attack of blight, with a consequently abnormally high consumption of fungicides (more than 6 kg per ha). … treatment frequency index varies between crops … The treatment frequency shows largely the same picture, with use of 5 standard doses of herbicides in beets and up to 2 standard doses is peas, maize, seed production and winter wheat, just over 1 standard dose in the other crops (Figure 2.6). Treatment with fungicides lay between 0 and 1 standard dose, with the highest treatment frequency index in winter wheat. The treatment frequency index for insecticides was 1.2 and 0.8, respectively, in beets and rape, while, for growth regulators, it was 0.8 in rye and 0.4 in seed production. In total, the treatment frequency index for pesticides was 6.4 in beets (6.6 in potatoes) and 2-3 in the other crops, apart from spring barley, in which it was 1.6. Figure 2.5 Look here! Figure 2.6 Look here! … and between years, depending on the weather As stated, the above-mentioned figures are based on a questionnaire-based survey for a single year, with the farmers’ actual consumption calculated for the individual crops. Consumption naturally varies from year to year, depending on the weather etc., and the results may therefore deviate from the recommended doses. However, the survey is the first of its kind in which an attempt is made to arrive at a representative measure of pesticide consumption in different forms of farming. 2.3 Pesticide consumption in market gardening and forestry There are no statistics for pesticide consumption in market gardening and forestry, but the account statistics for market gardening give some indication of the pesticides’ share of the costs in this sector. As in the case of farming, chemicals comprise both pesticides and other chemical aids – of which growth regulators (growth retardants) are of particular importance in the production of pot plants. In addition, chemical agents are used for disinfecting soil etc. Pesticide consumption is highest in fruit and berries As shown in Table 2.4, chemicals’ share of the costs in market gardening varies considerably from production to production. The highest consumption is in fruit and berries, in which chemicals account for over 7 per cent of the total costs. Biological control in greenhouses In the production of outdoor vegetables, chemical consumption accounts for 2 per cent of the costs. It will also be seen that biological control plays a rather significant role in greenhouse production. Compared with the consumption of chemicals in farming (Table 2.1), the costs for chemicals constitute a relatively small part of the total costs. It is thus only in fruit and berry production that the consumption is in line with farming. Table 2.4
Source: SJFI (1998c) 2.4 Summary The analysis shows that the choice of crop is the main factor determing pesticide consumption in farming. There is widespread use of herbicides for weed control in all crops, with the highest consumption per ha in root crops and the lowest in rape and spring barley. Fungicides are used particularly in potatoes, cereals and peas, while insecticides are mainly used in rape, cereals and beets. Growth regulators are used in rye, winter wheat and seed production. The above usage is reflected in the pesticide consumption in the different forms of farming. Measured by kg active ingredient per ha, pesticide consumption is highest at full-time farms and somewhat lower at part-time farms, which is in line with the somewhat lower intensity production at the latter. Owing to a large production of cash crops, pesticide consumption at arable farms is generally high, whereas dairy farms, with fewer cash crops and a larger acreage under grass, have a lower consumption. Consumption at pig farms is largely level with that at dairy farms. The analysis also shows that total pesticide consumption in the agricultural sector, measured in kg active ingredient per ha, fell by half from the mid-1980s to 1997, but was not accompanied by a similar fall in treatment frequency index. One reason for this anomaly is a big reduction in the acreage used for root crops in the period in question, which helped to reduce the need for pesticides, while the change from spring to winter cereals worked in the opposite direction. Compared with farming, chemicals’ share of the costs in market gardening is relatively low. It is thus only in fruit and berry production that the share is approximately the same as in farming. The lower consumption is due in part to increasing use of biological methods of controlling pests in greenhouse production. 1 In 1992, the set-aside acreage was 220,000 ha, rising to 250,000 ha in 1994 and then falling to 147,000 in 1997. 2 Set-aside acreages have been placed slightly differently in the statistics since 1992, which makes comparison between years difficult.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||