Explore the vast range of titles available.

Numerous studies have examined how farmers are involved and behave in the use of pesticides, but what drives farmers’ intention to diminish pesticide applications is mostly unknown. This study explored farmers’ intention to minimize pesticide use, through the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and an adjusted form of the TPB, with perceived risk of loss as an additional variable to the original model. On a scale from 1 to 5, intention to reduce pesticide use had the lowest score of all variables (2.36), indicating that most farmers did not show intention to reduce pesticide use. Only 15.2% of the farmers were willing to reduce pesticide use, while 8.3% were undecided. Moreover, 58.2% of the farmers had high levels of perceived risk of loss by the reduction of pesticide use, which explained 37.3% of farmers’ intention. From the three variables of the TPB, attitudes had the highest score (3.34), indicating slightly favorable attitudes toward pesticide reduction, while perceived behavior control had the lowest score (2.70), indicating poor control of pesticide reduction. Also, the three basic variables of the TPB were positively correlated ( P < 0.01) with farmers’ intention to reduce pesticides, while a negative correlation ( P < 0.01) was noted between intention to reduce pesticides and perceived risk of loss. The three basic variables of the TPB were significant predictors of intention, capturing 54.7% of the variation in farmers’ intention. Adding perceived risk of loss as a construct to the TPB improved the predictive ability of the original model. Poor control of pesticide reduction (high-perceived barriers) and high perceived risk of loss drive farmers’ intention to reduce the use of pesticides. Advancing alternative crop protection methods focusing on agro-ecology and integrated pest management should be included in the work of extension services.

The health risks associated with chronic home pesticide use are not fully understood, partly due to a scarcity of large-scale studies containing the requisite data on long-term exposure. The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999–2004, which includes data on indoor and outdoor pesticide use in the past month, offers a potential resource. If past-month use reflects long-term exposure, the NHANES data could facilitate investigation into the health risks associated with chronic pesticide use. To address this question, this study evaluates the correlation between long-term and past-month pesticide use. Using data from 477 California households, joint probability models were constructed to calculate the correlation between categories of annual pesticide use frequency and the binary indicator of past-month use. The model results indicated strong correlations: 0.766 for indoor spray and 0.733 for outdoor spray in the California sample. Additional data from other U.S. regions also suggests a strong link between these variables. Overall, the findings support the utilization of past-month pesticide use as a good proxy for chronic use, validating the use of the NHANES 1999–2004 data for the exploration of the health risks associated with chronic residential pesticide exposure.

PurposeChina is the world's largest consumer of pesticides. To increase the use efficiency and achieve more sustainable and environmentally friendly use of pesticides in China, it is crucial to understand why Chinese farmers use such a large amount of pesticides.Design/methodology/approachThe relationship between farm size and pesticide use was investigated by using national household-level panel data from 1995 to 2016.FindingFarms that are small and fragmented lead to the use of large amounts of pesticides in China. For a given crop type, three factors contribute to a negative relationship between farm size and pesticide use: the spillover effect from the use of pesticides by other farmers in the same village, the level of mechanization and the management ability of farmers. The first two factors play important roles in the cultivation of grain crops, while the last factor is the main reason why farmers with larger plots of land use fewer pesticides in the cultivation of vegetables. In addition, the effect of agricultural machinery services on reducing the use of pesticides is currently limited, and the service system in China is still insufficient, which has been pointed out that it is also due to the prevalence of small and fragmented farms.Originality/valueThe authors investigate and compare the farm size–pesticide use relationship in both grain and cash crop production. Moreover, the authors systematically explore and explain how farm size is related to a reduction in pesticide use in the cultivation of grain crops and cash crops. These results can help to better understand the role of land scale in pesticide use, lay a foundation for the formulation of policies to reduce pesticide use and provide valuable knowledge about pesticide use for other developing countries around the world.

Policymakers often assume that farmers with pro-environmental behavior are more likely to follow proper pesticide practices and thus, in order to improve the safety of their pesticide practices, they implement strategies and programs designed to raise environmental awareness among the general public. The aim of this paper is to examine whether pro-environmental behavior can instigate proper pesticide practices among farmers. According to our results, farmers’ environmental behavior does not affect their pesticide practices and thus strategies aiming at raising environmental awareness among the general public would not prompt them to follow proper pesticide practices. In addition, the respondents reported following overall proper practices such as wearing masks and appropriate clothes during sprayings as well as rinsing the empty containers by performing the triple-rinse method. However, they did not wear gloves during applications, and many disposed the remaining pesticide concentrate to non-arable land. To conclude, in order to improve farmers’ pesticide practices, strategies and programs specifically designed for farmers must be developed because those addressed to the general public would not be effective. Moreover, certain improper practices found in this study ought to be addressed by policymakers and actors involved in the agricultural sector.

Organic agriculture is a production system that relies on prevention, ecological processes, biodiversity, mechanical processes, and natural cycles to control pests and maintain productivity. Pesticide use is generally limited or absent in organic agroecosystems, in contrast with non-organic (conventional) production systems that primarily rely on pesticides for crop protection. Significant differences in pesticide use between the two production systems markedly alter the relative dietary exposure and risk levels and the environmental impacts of pesticides. Data are presented on pesticide use on organic and non-organic farms for all crops and selected horticultural crops. The relative dietary risks that are posed by organic and non-organic food, with a focus on fresh produce, are also presented and compared. The results support the notion that organic farms apply pesticides far less intensively than conventional farms, in part because, over time on well-managed organic farms, pest pressure falls when compared to the levels on nearby conventional farms growing the same crops. Biopesticides are the predominant pesticides used in organic production, which work by a non-toxic mode of action, and pose minimal risks to human health and the environment. Consequently, eating organic food, especially fruits and vegetables, can largely eliminate the risks posed by pesticide dietary exposure. We recommend ways to lower the pesticide risks by increased adoption of organic farming practices and highlight options along organic food supply chains to further reduce pesticide use, exposures, and adverse worker and environmental impacts.

Reduction of pesticide use is one of the major challenges in the agricultural sector. Several methods, including efficiency analysis, have been proposed to address this issue. In general, efficiency analysis in the use of pesticides is conducted at the individual level (e.g., farm). We here propose to extend this analysis from farm level to aggregate (or district) level. In addition to the potential pesticide reduction by eliminating individual inefficiency, we measure the reduction due to the reallocation of productive activity across farms, within increasingly large spatial units. Results show that pesticides could be reduced by more than 50% in a sample of farms in the French Department of Meuse during 2014–2016, after eliminating individual technical inefficiency and reallocating activities across farms at the largest spatial unit, while producing at least the same output. Therefore, the reallocation associated with inefficiency elimination can help achieve the pesticide reduction targets set by several countries.

This study examined the effectiveness of Thailand’s Q-GAP initiative in raising cabbage farmers’ awareness regarding food safety assurance and improving their pesticide use practices by comparing 41 Q-GAP-certified and 90 uncertified farmers in Chiang Mai Province, Thailand. The research methods included a questionnaire survey administered to the participating farmers and laboratory pesticide residue testing of their cabbage produce samples. The research found that certified farmers had a significantly more heedful attitude than uncertified farmers toward the effects of pesticide use on the users, consumers, and the environment. This is supported by the higher level of Q-GAP training experiences. Compared to uncertified farmers, a significantly lower proportion of certified farmers also applied either insecticide, fungicide, or herbicide, with significantly less frequencies when including in the analysis those who did not use the particular pesticide. In the pesticide residue analysis, no significant difference was found between the two types of farms regarding the number of farms detected with maximum residue level exceedance in the sample produce and regarding the results of the aggregate organophosphate pesticide analysis. However, it was found that the produce of the uncertified farmers contained significantly more residue in the aggregate synthetic pyrethroid pesticide analysis as compared to that of the certified farmers. These findings indicate the Q-GAP-certified farmers’ progress in process control from earlier Q-GAP studies on compliance. However, considering the limited achievements of certified farmers in pesticide handling and recordkeeping, and those of the Department of Agriculture officers in auditing, there is a need for more governmental efforts, especially in these areas.

This multi-level study focuses on Thailand’s public good agricultural practices certification standard (Q-GAP) and compares the performance of 100 certified and 229 uncertified growers regarding their pesticide use practices and the levels of pesticide residues detected in on-farm samples. Chili pepper, a crop primarily marketed domestically, was the focal point of this study conducted in the production context of Chiang Mai province. The data for the study were collected through field interview surveys and chili pepper sample collections. The collected crop samples underwent organophosphate pesticide and synthetic pyrethroid analyses using gas chromatography. Statistical analysis techniques, including one-way ANOVA, chi-square tests, probit regression, and multiple linear regression, were employed to analyze the numerical data using the Stata software. The study’s findings revealed several key points. The certified farmers’ main motivation for adopting Q-GAP was to meet market requirements, rather than ensuring safety assurance. They exhibited a significantly lower adoption of insecticides compared to the uncertified farmers, but no significant differences were observed for fungicide or herbicide adoption. The analysis of the pesticide residue results yielded mixed findings, making it challenging to conclude whether certified farmers have better control over pesticide residues compared to uncertified farmers. A probit regression analysis highlighted the critical importance of training for growers’ adoption of the standard.

IntroductionAlthough pesticides play a critical role in enhancing crop productivity, their improper use poses serious threats to health and the environment. This study assessed the effectiveness of Ukulima True campaign a Social and Behavior Change Communication (SBCC) campaign in Kenya, aimed at reducing pesticide risks by promoting safer farming practices.MethodsA cross-sectional mixed-methods approach was used, involving surveys with 406 farmers and 12 Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) in Subukia Sub-County. Descriptive statistics such as frequencies and means were used to summarize the data. Evaluation findings were compared with the baseline values. The differences in all variables were assessed for statistical significance using chi-square test for categorical variables and t-test for continuous variables.ResultsThe results show that 68% of farmers became aware of the campaign, with peer-to-peer learning and radio emerging as the most influential communication channels. The campaign led to notable behavior changes, with 86.4% of farmers adopting at least three Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices and 85.7% regularly monitoring their fields for pests and diseases. Awareness of approved pesticides rose to 70%, while adherence to Pre-harvest Intervals (PHI) increased to 86.4%. The use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during pesticide application also improved, and the uptake of Spray Service Providers (SSPs) increased to 18.6%, further reducing farmers' direct exposure to pesticides.DiscussionThis study demonstrates the value of SBCC in transforming pesticide-related behaviors in agriculture. A multi-channel, community-driven strategy proved effective in reaching diverse farmer groups and encouraging safer practices. The Ukulima True campaign successfully increased awareness and adoption of safe pesticide practices, demonstrating the potential of SBCC in risk reduction and sustainable agriculture. However, challenges remain in addressing PPE access, behavioral barriers, and gender disparities. Integrating SBCC with policy support and multi-stakeholder collaboration is crucial for sustainable pesticide risk reduction.

Reducing pesticide use is of great significance for ensuring the quality and safety of agricultural products, as well as alleviating agricultural non-point source pollution. Exploring the mechanisms by which environmental regulation drives pesticide reduction under different scenarios can help improve policy effectiveness and promote the sustainable development of agriculture. Utilizing panel data from 30 Chinese provinces spanning the period of 2010 to 2023, this study empirically analyzed the impact of environmental regulation on pesticide use through a fixed-effect model and further explored the moderating role of agricultural economic scale in this process. Moreover, a heterogeneity analysis was conducted based on regional and environmental regulation dimensions, respectively. The findings reveal that, overall, there exists an inverted U-shaped relationship between environmental regulation and pesticide use, where it initially increases and then decreases. Agricultural economic scale, serving as a moderating variable, amplifies the promotional effect of environmental regulation on pesticide reduction and accelerates the attainment of the inflection point of the inverted U-shaped curve. Regional heterogeneity analyses reveal an inverted U-shaped relationship between environmental regulation and pesticide use in the eastern and central regions, while this relationship is not significant in the western region. Notably, market-based environmental regulation exhibits a more pronounced impact compared to command-and-control environmental regulation.