Report from the Sub-committee on Agriculture

4. Definition of the work and general assumptions for the analysis

4.1 Definition of the work
4.2 Assumptions for the sub-committee’s work

4.1 Definition of the work

The sub-committee made extensive use of external consultants to procure specialist reports and data as a basis for its work and reporting. We generally sought to compose the project groups behind the specialist reports called for so that they represented experts from the universities, the sectoral research institutions and the agricultural industries' advisory services.

When the sub-committee received the specialist reports, we appointed referees from the sub-committee, who discussed the reports with the consultants before final approval. Although the specialist reports do not necessarily reflect the views of the sub-committee, they largely formed the basis for our work. In many cases, the reports are cited, but this should not be taken to mean that they were the primary source of the information. Readers desiring amplifying information in the different areas are referred to the specialist reports.

The sub-committee also regularly considered the input sent in, particularly in connection with the Midway Conference on 21 September 1998.

The sub-committee appointed a number of project groups with external experts. The project groups prepared reports on the following topics:

Alternative methods:

	Compilation of existing knowledge concerning possibilities of preventing diseases in agricultural crops through the use of resistant plants. Mogens S. Hovmøller (DIAS), Birger Eriksen (Sejet Plant Breeding Centre), Hanne Østergaard (Risø), Lisa Munk (The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University), Jon Birger Pedersen (Danish Agricultural Advisory Centre)
	Compilation of existing knowledge and possibilities of preventing and controlling problems with seed-borne diseases in agricultural crops. Bent J. Nielsen (DIAS), Anders Borgen (The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University), Christiane Scheel (Plant Directorate), Ghita C. Nielsen (Danish Agricultural Advisory Centre)
	Possibility of preventing pest attacks in agricultural crops through the use of insect-resistant plants. Lars Monrad Hansen (DIAS), Arne Kirkeby Thomsen (Danish Forest and Landscape Research Institute)
	Possibility of using biological methods of preventing and controlling diseases in agricultural and market-garden crops. Annie Enkegaard (DIAS), Jørgens Eilenberg and Dan Funck Jensen (both from The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University), Pernille Folker-Hansen (Horticultural Advisory Service), Klaus Paaske (DIAS), Bent Bromand (DIAS), Susanne Elmholt (DIAS)
	Possibility of preventing attacks by pests in agricultural crops through the use of alternative methods and crops. Jørgen E. Olesen (DIAS), Svend Erik Simmelsgaard (DIAS), Poul Flengmark (DIAS), Uffe Jørgensen (DIAS).
	Prevention of weed problems and mechanical control of weeds and effects on the seed pool. Michael Tersbøl (Danish Agricultural Advisory Centre), Gunnar Mikkelsen (DIAS), Ilse Rasmussen (DIAS), Svend Christensen (DIAS)
	Possibility of reducing drift problems in connection with spraying through spraying techniques and possibilities of improving farming practice to reduce the risk of point-source contamination during cleaning and filling of sprayers. Peter Kryger Jensen (DIAS), Lars Stenvang-Hansen (Danish Agricultural Advisory Centre), Jens Johnsen Høy (National Department of Buildings and Machines)
	Compilation of existing knowledge concerning the possibility of using genetically modified crops in agriculture. Preben Bach Holm (DIAS), Katrine Hauge Madsen (The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University), Bodil Jørgensen (DIAS), Peter Ulvskov (DIAS)
	Compilation of existing knowledge on the possibility of using warning and damage-threshold models in agriculture. Svend Christensen (DIAS), Karen Henriksen (DIAS), Jens Erik Jensen and Peter Esbjerg (both from The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University)
	Descriptions of agricultural scenarios
	Description of relevant crop rotations in a 100% (present production) scenario, an economically optimised scenario and a 0% scenario within agriculture. Gunnar Mikkelsen, Ib Sillebak Kristensen, Søren Holm, Peter Kryger Jensen, Lise Nistrup Jørgensen (all DIAS)
	Description of relevant factors in a 0+, + and ++scenario. Lise Nistrup Jørgensen (DIAS), Peter Kryger Jensen (DIAS), Ib Sillebak Kristensen (DIAS)
	Compilation of existing knowledge concerning problems in connection with potato production in the event of total or partial phasing out of pesticides. Søren Holm (DIAS)
	Variation in the yield of agricultural crops with conventional cultivation. Lars Kjær (Danish Agricultural Advisory Centre)
	Evaluation of the quality aspects of vegetable production in the event of total or partial phasing out of pesticides: Problems with the content of types of weeds in the main agricultural crops must be assessed. Peter Kryger Jensen (DIAS), Per Kudsk (DIAS), Poul Henning Petersen (Danish Agricultural Advisory Centre), Kirsten Pilegård (Danish Veterinary and Food Administration), Ole Ladefoged (Danish Veterinary and Food Administration), Torben Borggaard (DLF-Trifolium).

Descriptions of market gardening scenarios

	Description of relevant production factors in a 100% (present production) scenario and a 0% scenario within the market gardening sector's fruit and berry production. Hanne Lindhard (DIAS), Hans Bach-Lauritsen (Horticultural Advisory Service), Asger Nøhr Rasmussen (DIAS), Maren Korsgard (Zealand Family Farms), Jesper Thorup (organic fruit grower)
	Description of relevant production factors in a 100% (present production) scenario and a 0% scenario within the market gardening sector's greenhouse production. Carl Otto Ottosen (DIAS), Asger Nøhr Rasmussen (DIAS), Torben Lippert (Horticultural Advisory Service), Lars Rosager and Kalle Kristensen (Fredericia Municipal Parks and Horticulture Department)
	Description of relevant production factors in a 100% (present production) and a 0% scenario within the market gardening sector's production of outdoor vegetables. Kirsten Friis (Danish Agricultural Advisory Centre), Bo Melander (DIAS), Lis Sørensen (DIAS), Maren Korsgaard (Zealand Family Farms)
	Description of relevant production factors in a 100% (present production) scenario and a 0% scenario within the market gardening sector's nursery production. Poul Erik Brander (DIAS), Georg Noyé (DIAS), Asger Nøhr Rasmussen (DIAS), Bent Leonhard (Association of Danish Nursery Owners), Henrik Sivertsen (Horticultural Advisory Service)

Descriptions of forestry scenarios

Report on scenarios for phasing out pesticides within private forestry. Kaj Østergård (Danish Forest and Landscape Research Institute), Hans Maltha Hedegaard (Danish Forest Association), Jens Søgaard Jacobsen (Association of Danish Christmas-tree Producers), Thomas Rubow (DIAS), Ib Henning Christensen (Danish Forestry College), Torsten Dybkjær (National Forest and Nature Agency), Flemming Nielsen (National Forest and Nature Agency)

Comments from the Danish Agricultural Advisory Centre to the pesticide report for private forestry. Lars Møller Nielsen

Comments received from persons/institutions that are not members of the sub-committees:

	Comments from the Potato Starch Industry, 4 June 1998.
	Parliamentary debate on changed rules for Roundup spraying of cereal fields (12 August 1998).
	Parliamentary debate on the use of growth regulators.
	Novartis/Ole Jensen: Comments to the Sub-committee on Agriculture following the Midway Conference (28 September 1998).
	Novartis/Mads Kristensen: Comments to the Pesticide Committee (28 September 1998).
	Potato Starch Industry: Comments following the Midway Conference (25 September 1998).
	Cillus/E. Rubæk: Comments concerning the need for seed-dressing (24 September 1998).
	Køge-Ringsted Farmers' Association/Jakob Kjærsgaard: Crop-specific treatment frequency index – a necessity (23 September 1998).
	Zeneca/Freddy K. Pedersen: Comments to the Midway Conference (23 September 1998).
	Køge-Ringsted Farmers' Association: Report on zero-pesticide cultivation (3 September 1998).

Besides these, the committees' members have presented a number of written contributions, which the sub-committee has included in its work.

4.2  Assumptions for the sub-committee’s work

On the basis of the background reports and written contributions, the sub-committee has carried out a critical evaluation of the consequences for farming of a total or partial phase-out of pesticides and evaluated alternative, non-chemical methods of preventing/controlling pests. The views given in the background reports do not necessarily express the views of the sub-committees.

To carry out its task, the sub-committee had to delimit it and set up specific assumptions, including those listed below:

	An evaluation has been carried out on the basis of 12 crop rotations representing cultivation on clayey and sandy soil (see the description in chapter 5). 10 of the regimes are described in detail. The two farm types covering farms of less than 20 ha on clayey and sandy soil, respectively, have been omitted from the detailed descriptions.
	Only average yields and average farms on clayey and sandy soil have been evaluated. We have thus not included problems concerning particularly difficult types of soil, such as marshy and humus soil, and have not taken account of the fact that some types of soil have particularly large weed populations.
	Losses from diseases and pests have been extracted from trials in which the degree of attack and the effect on yields are treated as a single parameter. There are almost no data from trials in which the losses are evaluated in different crop rotations and with different cultivation parameters.
	The percentage losses as a consequence of weeds come mainly from organic all-year farms, most of which are dairy farms. These data have been modified to compensate for the small use made of mechanical control at dairy farms today (Mikkelsen et al., 1998).
	In the agronomic scenarios, we have kept the present set-aside acreage with permanent grass. In the economically optimised crop rotations, 30% set-aside acreage is allowed at the individual farms. Nationally, this means 18% set-aside acreage.
	In the calculation of contribution margins we have used prices from 1995/96 and figures from 2000 farms from Danish Institute of Agricultural and Fisheries Economics (DIAFE), which are also divided into 10 types of farm.
	We have based our evaluation of the scenarios on the present production, which is not optimal in all areas. In the scenarios it is a basic assumption that the farmers will act rationally and economically optimally on the basis of the conditions set up. This cannot be expected at all farms. Some of the scenarios – particularly the economically optimised ones – are therefore generally too optimistic. This is of greatest significance for the economic analyses at farm level.