Figure 1 - uploaded by Ersilia Di Tullio
Content may be subject to copyright.
2-EU27 wheat price variations estimated in the hypothesis of loss of azoles (2013) 

2-EU27 wheat price variations estimated in the hypothesis of loss of azoles (2013) 

Source publication
Technical Report
Full-text available
The objective of this study is to make an assessment of the socio-economic importance in European agriculture of azoles active substances. In order to evaluate the actual relevance of this class of compounds, the economic impact of a withdrawal from use of azoles has been estimated, considering the specific case study of wheat. The evaluation of th...

Similar publications

Article
Full-text available
Cancer is a condition caused by many mechanisms (genetic, immune, oxidation, and inflammatory). Anticancer therapy aims to destroy or stop the growth of cancer cells. Resistance to treatment is theleading cause of the inefficiency of current standard therapies. Targeted therapies are the most effective due to the low number of side effects and low...

Citations

... It is an integrated approach that utilizes appropriate physical, chemical, and biological methods of control. Empirical evidence suggests that careful application of IPM practices can be a viable way to prevent the overuse and unnecessary application of pesticides without incurring significant yield losses (Jacquet et al. 2011, Lechenet et al. 2014, 2017 though this is debated (Di Tullio et al. 2012, Hossard et al. 2014. ...
Article
Full-text available
Enhanced awareness and knowledge among arable (field crop) farmers and agronomists are pivotal for making informed integrated pest management (IPM) decisions. In this study, we had 3 primary objectives: (i) identifying the key factors influencing the adoption of IPM, (ii) gathering insights into the currently perceived pest threats, and (iii) identifying any necessary intervention tools or methods for modifying the flow of information. In 2021, a telephone survey involving 267 arable and arable/livestock farmers and 26 agronomists was conducted in Scotland. The survey was designed to gather information on the perceived invertebrate pest, disease, and weed threats, the extent of IPM implementation, and the sources of information consulted. Several factors influenced the uptake of IPM, including farm type, location, agronomist engagement, farmer’s age, education, and membership in schemes promoting IPM. Notably, there were disparities in perceptions of the most significant pest threats between arable farmers and agronomists. This points to a division of decision-making responsibilities and, consequently, varying information needs. Agronomists typically require technical information related to pesticide effectiveness and disease management, whereas arable farmers seek guidance on cultural approaches for managing weeds and invertebrate pests. Furthermore, preferences for information sources also differed, with agronomists showing a preference for social media as a source of IPM information, while farmers favored the farming press. Ultimately, a deeper understanding of IPM practices equips farmers to actively participate in IPM discussions with their agronomists. This enables the collaborative development of an effective IPM strategy and, in turn, increases the adoption of IPM practices.
... Several European studies have shown that IPM can reduce reliance on conventional pesticides while maintaining crop yields and profitability. [2][3][4][5] IPM adoption is widely accepted as being crucial for the sustainability of crop production in Europe and consequently it has been written into European policy. 1 While several studies have suggested that IPM may lead to a reduction in crop productivity and profitability, [6][7][8] the weight of empirical evidence suggests that careful application of IPM practices can be a viable way to prevent the overuse and unnecessary application of pesticides without incurring significant yield losses. [2][3][4][5] Arable crops in the UK and Ireland are amongst the most intensively managed in Europe in relation to pesticide use, with farmers applying, on average, more than triple the amount used elsewhere in other European countries. 9 Due to the increasing problem of pesticide resistance, combined with loss of active ingredients, the need for higher levels of IPM uptake is ever more important if these production systems are to remain viable. ...
Article
Full-text available
BACKGROUND Arable crops in temperate climatic regions such as the UK and Ireland are subject to a multitude of pests (weeds, diseases and vertebrate/invertebrate pests) that can negatively impact productivity if not properly managed. Integrated pest management (IPM) is widely promoted as a sustainable approach to pest management, yet there are few recent studies assessing adoption levels and factors influencing this in arable cropping systems in the UK and Ireland. This study used an extensive farmer survey to address both these issues. RESULTS Adoption levels of various IPM practices varied across the sample depending on a range of factors relating to both farm and farmer characteristics. Positive relationships were observed between IPM adoption and farmed area, and familiarity with IPM. Choice of pest control information sources was also found to be influential on farmer familiarity with IPM, with those who were proactive in seeking information from impartial sources being more engaged and reporting higher levels of adoption. CONCLUSION Policies that encourage farmers to greater levels of engagement with their pest management issues and more proactive information seeking, such as through advisory professionals, more experienced peers through crop walks, open days and discussion groups should be strongly encouraged.
... The reduction of pesticide use is one of the critical drivers to preserve the environment and human health. Pesticide use could be reduced through the adoption of new production strategies 3-5 ; however, whether substantial reductions of pesticide use are possible without impacting crop productivity and profitability is debatable [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] . Here, we demonstrated that low pesticide use rarely decreases productivity and profitability in arable farms. ...
... The reduction of pesticide use is one of the critical drivers to preserve the environment and human health. Pesticide use could be reduced through the adoption of new production strategies [3][4][5] ; however, whether substantial reductions of pesticide use are possible without impacting crop productivity and profitability is debatable [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] . Here, we demonstrated that low pesticide use rarely decreases productivity and profitability in arable farms. ...
... Although many studies have focused on the assessment of the sustainability of conventional versus innovative farming strategies 6,7,9,13,14,16,17 , whether agriculture with less pesticide would be as productive and profitable as current agriculture practices remains controversial. Some studies mention that pesticides are essential for controlling pests and for ensuring a high level of food security 8 , and that a reduction of pesticide use may lead to drastic yield and profit losses 10,12,15 . Other studies claim that pesticides threaten agricultural sustainability 19 , and that a significant reduction of pesticide use can be conciliated with high levels of performance, including crop productivity and farm profitability 11,16 . ...
Article
Full-text available
Achieving sustainable crop production while feeding an increasing world population is one of the most ambitious challenges of this century1. Meeting this challenge will necessarily imply a drastic reduction of adverse environmental effects arising from agricultural activities2. The reduction of pesticide use is one of the critical drivers to preserve the environment and human health. Pesticide use could be reduced through the adoption of new production strategies3, 4, 5; however, whether substantial reductions of pesticide use are possible without impacting crop productivity and profitability is debatable6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. Here, we demonstrated that low pesticide use rarely decreases productivity and profitability in arable farms. We analysed the potential conflicts between pesticide use and productivity or profitability with data from 946 non-organic arable commercial farms showing contrasting levels of pesticide use and covering a wide range of production situations in France. We failed to detect any conflict between low pesticide use and both high productivity and high profitability in 77% of the farms. We estimated that total pesticide use could be reduced by 42% without any negative effects on both productivity and profitability in 59% of farms from our national network. This corresponded to an average reduction of 37, 47 and 60% of herbicide, fungicide and insecticide use, respectively. The potential for reducing pesticide use appeared higher in farms with currently high pesticide use than in farms with low pesticide use. Our results demonstrate that pesticide reduction is already accessible to farmers in most production situations. This would imply profound changes in market organization and trade balance.
... The reduction of pesticide use is one of the critical drivers to preserve the environment and human health. Pesticide use could be reduced through the adoption of new production strategies 3-5 ; however, whether substantial reductions of pesticide use are possible without impacting crop productivity and profitability is debatable [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] . Here, we demonstrated that low pesticide use rarely decreases productivity and profitability in arable farms. ...
... The reduction of pesticide use is one of the critical drivers to preserve the environment and human health. Pesticide use could be reduced through the adoption of new production strategies [3][4][5] ; however, whether substantial reductions of pesticide use are possible without impacting crop productivity and profitability is debatable [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] . Here, we demonstrated that low pesticide use rarely decreases productivity and profitability in arable farms. ...
... Although many studies have focused on the assessment of the sustainability of conventional versus innovative farming strategies 6,7,9,13,14,16,17 , whether agriculture with less pesticide would be as productive and profitable as current agriculture practices remains controversial. Some studies mention that pesticides are essential for controlling pests and for ensuring a high level of food security 8 , and that a reduction of pesticide use may lead to drastic yield and profit losses 10,12,15 . Other studies claim that pesticides threaten agricultural sustainability 19 , and that a significant reduction of pesticide use can be conciliated with high levels of performance, including crop productivity and farm profitability 11,16 . ...
... The reduction of pesticide use is one of the critical drivers to preserve the environment and human health. Pesticide use could be reduced through the adoption of new production strategies 3-5 ; however, whether substantial reductions of pesticide use are possible without impacting crop productivity and profitability is debatable [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] . Here, we demonstrated that low pesticide use rarely decreases productivity and profitability in arable farms. ...
... The reduction of pesticide use is one of the critical drivers to preserve the environment and human health. Pesticide use could be reduced through the adoption of new production strategies [3][4][5] ; however, whether substantial reductions of pesticide use are possible without impacting crop productivity and profitability is debatable [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] . Here, we demonstrated that low pesticide use rarely decreases productivity and profitability in arable farms. ...
... Although many studies have focused on the assessment of the sustainability of conventional versus innovative farming strategies 6,7,9,13,14,16,17 , whether agriculture with less pesticide would be as productive and profitable as current agriculture practices remains controversial. Some studies mention that pesticides are essential for controlling pests and for ensuring a high level of food security 8 , and that a reduction of pesticide use may lead to drastic yield and profit losses 10,12,15 . Other studies claim that pesticides threaten agricultural sustainability 19 , and that a significant reduction of pesticide use can be conciliated with high levels of performance, including crop productivity and farm profitability 11,16 . ...
... Considering current production trends within the EU-28, it has been estimated that the removal of the azoles may potentially reduce European wheat production by up to 9.9 million t in the short term, but with the loss of expected expansion and yield increases this may increase to 18.6 million t by 2020. 25 If such a loss of production were to occur, it is likely that the EU-28 would become a net importer of wheat, which would inevitably increase the price of wheat both within the EU-28 countries and within the wider global market. At a national level it has been estimated that production of wheat in the United Kingdom, France and Denmark would be reduced by 6.8, 8.7 and 5%, respectively, if all azoles were withdrawn. ...
... A similar situation could arise in countries throughout Northern Europe. 25,26 Consequently, sustainable food production and food availability in general will become an issue for the entire Community. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background European Community (EC) legislation has limited the availability of pesticide active substances used in effective plant protection products. The Pesticide Authorisation Directive (PAD) 91/414/EEC, introduced the principle of risk assessment for approval of pesticide active substances. This principle was modified by the introduction of Regulation (EC) 1107/2009, which applies hazard, the intrinsic toxicity of the active substance, rather than risk, the potential for hazard to occur, as approval criterion.ResultsPotential impacts of EC pesticide legislation on agriculture in Ireland are summarised and whilst these will significantly impact pesticide availability in the medium- to long-term, regulations associated with water quality (Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) (WFD) and the Drinking Water Directive (1998/83/EC) (DWD)) have the potential to restrict pesticide use more immediately, as concerns regarding public health and economic costs associated with removing pesticides from water increase.Conclusion This rationale will further reduce availability of effective pesticide active substances, directly affecting crop protection and increasing pesticide resistance within pest and disease populations. In addition, water quality requirements may also impact on important active substances used in plant protection in Ireland. The future challenge for agriculture in Ireland is to sustain production and profitability using reduced pesticide inputs within a framework of IPM.