Summary

Evaluering af målopfyldelse og virkemidler i Pesticidplan 2004-09

Background and scope
The investigation
Main conclusions
Project results

Background and scope

The Pesticide Action Plan 2004-2009 proposal was passed in 2003. The overall objective, minimizing the impact of pesticides on the environment and health, e.g. by reducing frequency of treatment (a specific measure for the amount of pesticides used per hectare in conventional farming) and by promoting pesticide-free agriculture, was a natural extension of the two preceding pesticide plans. Additionally, the new plan aimed at the establishment of buffer zones, reducing the amount of pesticide residue in foods and animal feed, groundwater protection and reducing public and household use of pesticides.

The political debate on the increased usage of pesticides in agriculture, which resulted in an increasing divergence between the political agenda and actual development, led to the decision to move forward the evaluation of the Pesticide Action Plan 2004-2009 from the first half of 2010 to the second half of 2008. Subsequent to a bidding round in April 2008, the Danish EPA signed a contract with Ramboll Management to perform the evaluation.

The evaluation report will be used as a base for proposals for the improvement of the current Pesticide Action Plan or to facilitate the creation of a new pesticide plan, but will not generate any such proposals itself.

The investigation

The evaluation has been conducted based on a series of partial evaluations, carried out by the institutions responsible for the different objectives and instruments in the pesticide plan. The details of these are available in the series of evaluation notes written in accordance with Rambøll Management guidelines. The overall structure of the evaluation is based upon the set objectives and their related instruments. Rambøll Management has structured the overall evaluation report based on the evaluation notes, with the inclusion of other relevant material.

The evaluation focuses on nine main objectives.

1. Reduction in pesticide usage – frequency of treatment

2. Establishment of pesticide-free buffer zones

3. Pesticide-free agriculture – organic farming

4. Leaching of pesticides into groundwater

5. Reduction in the environmental and health impact on commercial gardening and orchard farming

6. Pesticide residue in food and animal feed

7. Reduction in public use of pesticides

8. Reduction in private use of pesticides

9. Enforcement of a restrictive pesticide approval scheme

Correspondingly, relevant instruments are divided between ten key groups:

1. Counseling and the development of counseling, including:

Business counseling – agriculture and buffer zones
Business counseling – commercial gardening and orchard farming
Business counseling – point source contamination
Improvement of counseling

2. Pesticide research

3. The zoning project

4. The early warning system

5. Organic regulation

6. Pesticide residue in food

7. Pesticide taxation

8. Reduction of pesticide use in public areas

9. Reduction of the pesticide burden in private gardens

10. Restrictive pesticide approval scheme

An examination of the objectives and instruments reveals that the pesticide plan is broadly constructed to include highly heterogeneous goals and means, and has a wide and complex scope. Each objective and subsidiary objective is supported by an extensive list of instruments and actions, which in turn influence other objectives, and are affected by other instruments. Some of the instruments are only partially financed by the pesticide plan’s budget, whilst other instruments in the pesticide plan serve an alternate, dual purpose. Simultaneously, there are many institutions, private and public, responsible for the implementation of a specific action or for the realization of one of the partial objectives.

Main conclusions

The goal of the pesticide plan is to minimize the burden of pesticides on health and the environment. This goal can be segregated into four overarching objectives:

§ Protection of the terrestrial environment

§ Minimizing pesticide residue in Danish produced or consumed foods

§ No leaching into the groundwater of approved pesticides above maximum residue limits

§ Protection of surface water

The nine objectives and the corresponding instruments mentioned above all aim at the fulfillment of one or more of these four overarching objectives.

An examination of the partial evaluations of the nine main objectives reveals that progress has been made in some areas, while development in other areas has reversed. Most of the nine objectives are formulated in very general terms, and are therefore difficult to quantify. As a result, it is not possible to conclude whether the objectives have been reached or not. In the two areas containing clearly defined objectives for 2004 – 09, specifically the extent of pesticide-free buffer zones and the frequency of treatment, no improvements have been registered. In fact, the frequency of treatment has increased significantly in the period measured, despite the objective of achieving a significant decrease. For all other objectives, no convincing progress has been registered.

Similarly, no clear improvements since 2004 are found for the four overarching objectives. With regards to pesticide usage in agriculture, which is defined as an indicator for the protection of the terrestrial environment in the pesticide plan, an adverse development has been observed. The other objectives indicate slight measurable improvements, but the overall impression appears to be a continuance of the status quo.

The majority of the instruments have been implemented successfully. A few were slightly delayed and others have not been sufficiently focused, but the overall impression suggests that the instruments and related activities are following the time schedule and will be completed prior to the termination of the pesticide plan in 2009.

The fact that it is not possible to conclude that progress has been made, nor whether any of the objectives have been attained, is due to several factors. First, a large part of the instruments are directed towards research and development and other long-term objectives, and can therefore not be expected to produce significant results within the set time period. Furthermore, the pesticide plan is constrained by a lack of concisely specified objectives and little apparent correlation between objectives and instruments. Finally, the pesticide plan has suffered from the absence of a collective authority, deficiencies in monitoring progress of the pesticide plan and its many subsidiary elements, as well as a lack of data facilitating monitoring of the results of the pesticide plan.

Project results

The reason for the increased usage of pesticides in agriculture is not precisely known, but it is not necessarily the result of ineffective instruments. Other factors, such as changing crop rotations, changes in weather conditions, or fluctuations in the prices of pesticides and crops, will impact the financially optimal amount of pesticide usage.

Counseling, which is the key instrument to reduce pesticide usage in the agricultural industry, has previously been met with success. It is considered one of the main factors which has contributed to the relatively low pesticide usage in Denmark relative to other, comparative, countries. However, the impact of the counseling instrument is dependent on which financially viable alternatives are available, and these, in turn, will be affected both in the long and short term by a series of exogenous factors. In particular, such factors include climate changes, changing crop rotations, relative prices, but also technological advances and the development of new insight and better methods.

Counseling can be regarded as pretty much the only instrument effective in reducing pesticide usage in the short term. Short term instruments make up only a small part of the total budget of the pesticide plan. Only approximately 20% of the budget is spent on instruments that can be expected to have a short term impact. The long term instruments are more concerned with indirect effects, and are not expected to have an impact within the set time period.

The long term instruments make up approximately 70% of the pesticide plan’s total budget of 145 mil. kr. Specifically, these are the research program, method development of counseling, the zoning project and the early warning system. Each of these instruments appears to have met expectations and delivered the desired information.

A significant element of the long term objectives has been the focus on knowledge acquisition, paving the way for future efforts. However, it is unclear to what degree this knowledge relates to the other instruments, and therefore unclear whether it can be counted as part of a focused environmental or health initiative. Whether this knowledge lives up to expectations in terms of value and cost effectiveness is unclear given the available information, and there appear to be no plans to implement the results of this research. Additionally, there appear to have been few or no operational targets for these instruments. However, it is believed that these objectives will have a positive impact in the long term, given that their results are put to use.

The evaluation highlights several points in the pesticide plan which are worth noting for the next pesticide plan proposal. These are the following:

A more focused effort

For both the overarching objectives as well as the more operational targets, a more focused effort is recommended, specifically in the formulation of short and long term objectives and in their related instruments. Using a combination of instruments that can be expected to contribute to the fulfillment of the objectives, will enable concurrent monitoring and supervision, and ease the subsequent evaluation of both the completed instruments and the results.

A point for further consideration is the formulation of specific objectives, e.g. for classifying different types of compound elements, and using a differentiated version of the pesticide taxes to secure focused effort. A focused research and development initiative would, in conjunction with differentiated pesticide taxes, be able to create financial initiatives for savings in select, high-priority areas. This will simultaneously increase the potential value of a continued counseling.

Improved databases and supervision

Planning and execution of a periodic data collection specifically tailored to the outlined objectives and selected indicators is recommended, in order to facilitate monitoring of each of the overarching objectives, which in turn will enable adjustments when the development diverges from the objective.

Focused implementation of the long term initiative

Based on this evaluation, it is recommended that future short and long term instruments be better integrated, such that the implementation of the results from the long term instruments has been considered in advance.

Improve organization of initiative

A more focused and coordinated effort can be acheived through an increased focus on the overarching objectives of the pesticide plan, i.e. protecting the terrestrial environment, groundwater, surface water and reducing residual pesticides in food. For each of these, responsibility for development should be clearly assigned and initiatives should be coordinated within an appropriate, high level institutional framework.

Inclusion of the work environment as an overarching objective

The instruments in the pesticide plan have aimed at improving work environments in different ways. It is recommended that this area is included in the considerations when formulating future objectives and corresponding instruments.