تجزیه و تحلیل اقتصادی از احتمال کاهش آفت کش ها در محصولات زراعی فرانسه
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|28896||2011||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Ecological Economics, Volume 70, Issue 9, 15 July 2011, Pages 1638–1648
The paper aims to study the effects of reducing pesticide use by farmers in the arable sector in France and the feasibility of a policy target of reducing pesticide use by half. The originality of the approach is to combine statistical data and expert knowledge to describe low-input alternative techniques at the national level. These data are used in a mathematical programming model to simulate the effect on land use, production and farmers' income of achieving different levels of pesticide reduction. The results show that reducing pesticide use by 30% could be possible without reducing farmers' income. We also estimate the levels of tax on pesticides necessary to achieve different levels of reduction of pesticide use and the effect of an incentive mechanism combining a pesticide tax with subsidies for low-input techniques.
The harm caused by pesticides to human health and the environment is a major subject of concern which involves some sensitive issues such as drinking water contamination, the health of users and the harmful effects on wildlife and biodiversity. In France, which ranks third in the world (and first in Europe) for the use of plant protection products, a strong social and political willingness was displayed in 2008, in a large social forum tracing objectives of the environmental policy of the country (known as the “Grenelle de l'environnement”). Ambitious targets were set and different measures and incentives are currently being implemented. The objective of reducing, if possible, the use of pesticides by half by 2018 has been announced. The issue of reducing pesticide use has also emerged in the environmental policy debates in several other European countries, and therefore in 2009 the European Union (EU) adopted a common framework (directive 2009/128/EC) that requires each member state to submit a 2012 action plan to reduce pesticide use in agriculture. The EU directive gives the policy launched in France a broader perspective. However the objectives set in 2008 are still under discussion: is the 50% reduction target realistic? What would be the consequences of such a level of reduction on French agricultural production and on farmers' income? What are the economic incentives needed to encourage such a reduction? Our research was conducted to help answer these questions.1 The work we present here concerns the French production of field crops. Although the use of pesticides per hectare of crops is not as high as in other crops (fruit, vegetables, and vineyards), the territorial extent of field crop production is such that any global reduction of pesticides in France necessarily involves a reduction in the field crops sector. In 2006, field crops represented 80% of the total cultivated land and accounted for 68% of the pesticides used in agriculture. During the last ten years pesticide use in French agriculture has been quite stable, showing no decrease despite a fall in prices for agricultural products relative to input prices. Most of the French production of field crops is grown using intensive conventional techniques. Although some farmers use less intensive techniques, it is difficult to know exactly what proportion of the total field crop area is concerned. The fraction of organic farming of the total field crop area is around 1% (Butault et al., 2010). In this context, the evaluation of the effect of a reduction in pesticide use on agricultural production raises the question of how to take account of the possible changes in the production techniques used by farmers. Most of the recent work on analysing the effects on European agriculture of a reduction in pesticide use based on economic simulation models does not consider this aspect. Because of this they lead to the conclusion that reinforcement of the regulation of pesticides would have dramatic consequences on the supply of agricultural products and farmers' income (Nomisma, 2008 and Adenauer and Witzke, 2008). However in Europe, particularly Denmark, there have been successes with policies for reducing pesticides allowing significant reduction without harm to the production or to farmers' income (Neumeister, 2007 and Nielsen, 2005). Taking account of farmers' changes of practices in the analysis of the effects of medium- and long-term policies is the main difficulty of approaches based on econometric estimations (Carpentier, 2010). From this point of view, mathematical programming has the advantage of allowing an analysis of modifications in the production decisions of farmers, independently of what has already been observed in the past. A detailed representation of the production technologies can be embodied in the economic models. It thus makes it possible to study the environmental impacts of agricultural production considering the joint production of agricultural outputs and environmental externalities. This explains why this approach has been adopted by many economists analysing the impacts of changes in agriculture practices on the environment (Buysse et al., 2007, Falconer and Hodge, 2001, Havlik et al., 2005, Mosnier et al., 2009, Peerlings and Polman, 2008 and Van Calker et al., 2008). However it is difficult to obtain the data needed for such analysis at an aggregated level. Consequently, the economic studies addressing the issue of pesticide use reduction are generally based on data from observations on a few farms, or data from agronomic experiments (Falconer and Hodge, 2000, Falconer and Hodge, 2001, Kerselaers et al., 2007 and Van Calker et al., 2008). Thus, most of them are conducted at the farm level. The novelty of our paper is to conduct an economic analysis of the possibility of reducing pesticide use at the national level (i.e. for France) using a mathematical programming model and taking into account alternative technologies. The construction of different production technologies by experts is the solution that we have chosen to provide indicators for techniques ranging from low-input to organic production, for which we lacked data in the farm-based surveys. Those experts used their knowledge combined with data from different sources from statistical surveys, experimental data and farm networks. We present the method in Section 2; firstly the design of current and alternative production techniques, then the model and the scenarios. In Section 3 we present the results. Section 4 is devoted to a discussion of the results and Section 5 to conclusions.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Our results demonstrate ways of reducing the use of pesticides for field crops without necessarily incurring considerable income losses for the producers. They show that we could reduce the use of pesticides by about 10% by decreasing the level of inputs without significant production loss. A more general adoption of integrated agriculture techniques could take us further and produce a reduction of 30% with a reduction in production but without affecting farmers' incomes. One of the first comments is that, on average, the intensive technique (used in 30% of the most intensive plots in the farming practices survey) appears to be less efficient than techniques using smaller quantities of inputs. We have suggested in the discussion part some reasons that could explain this situation. Without doubt more research is needed to better understand those reasons. They are to be found firstly in farmers' preferences toward risk, style of farming, environment or positional goods (such as yield) Next they are to be found in the brakes that upstream and downstream enterprises apply to the publicising of low-pesticide or low-input techniques. A reduction of 50% in the use of pesticides would involve profound changes in cultivation systems towards integrated production systems with longer rotation periods and the development of organic farming. This would result in a reduction in the total production volume, but also a modification in the nature of products, some being reduced more than others because of the change in land use. The drop in the production of rape raises in particular the question of the compatibility of a policy aimed to reduce pesticides with the biofuel policy which in France relies largely on the development of biodiesel based on rapeseed oil. Conversely, other crops should increase in order to take their place in the cropping systems, particularly leguminous plants. This also raises the question of the consequences on the markets and on the ability of supply chains to adapt to such changes. In terms of policies, different conclusions can be drawn from these results. In order to achieve a 10 to 20% reduction in pesticide use, the policies required should relate mainly to extension and training services, the role of institutions responsible for advising farmers being of central importance. Achieving higher reductions in the use of pesticides presupposes setting up other economic incentives or regulatory instruments. Pesticide taxation is probably the most efficient way to achieve reduction in pesticide use, but the level of taxes should be high enough for a taxation mechanism to be effective. In these cases compensation should be considered. Other economic incentives can be applied, in particular the remuneration of environmental services through voluntary contracts subsidising low-input practices, but here also the present appraisal of the Agri-Environmental measures of the second pillar of the CAP shows that more research is needed to combine acceptability and efficacy of the measures. The value of a sufficiently clear and ambitious policy is to send a strong signal to the farmers and also all the actors concerned: commercial, research and development organisations. It is important that this policy should be gradual and long-term, since the changes in technical systems will be the more thorough if they can benefit from dynamic effects. Hence the training of farmers, the selection of varieties best adapted to these new management systems (disease-resistant varieties), the development of new industries to exploit new crops introduced into long rotations (e.g. biomass for energy) all need time. Faced with a policy sending a clear signal, the whole socio-technical system can evolve, and if so it is possible that in ten years, the reduced pesticide use will not result in a fall in production volumes to the level we have obtained in our simulations.