This study examines whether pesticide risk indicators can be used to evaluate the environmental effects of pesticide applications within integrated pest management (IPM) projects. Pesticide risk indicators, commonly used in European countries, are mathematical equations that consider data inputs such as application rates, toxicity levels of a pesticide's active ingredient, meteorological data, the soil characteristics of farm fields, and other information to generate potential risk scores for pesticide applications. These potential risk scores represent the best estimate of a pesticide's impact on the surrounding environment. This project analyzed eight pesticide risk indicators, developed throughout Europe and the United States, with two years of pesticide application data from four farms using IPM. This two-year study allowed for a determination of the validity and reliability of pesticide risk indicators. The findings reveal that only three pesticide risk indicators performed consistently and gave valid results. These indicators are: the synoptic evaluation model for plant protection agents (SYNOPS) indicator from Germany, the multi-attribute toxicity factor from the United States, and the environmental impact quotient from the United States. As a result, the authors recommend these three indicators for future research and for IPM evaluative efforts that emphasize the environmental effects of pesticides.

After 15 years of promise, the new agricultural biotechnology is now being planted in farmers'fields and is found in America's food supply. Taken together with the promise of reduced pesticide use and the resulting healthier environment, the adoption and proper management of this technology, as well as public acceptance of it, is highly important for its continued use. This article considers objective attributes and subjective factors in the adoption and management of new technologies and applies them to a much-vaunted and widely used agricultural biotechnology that promises chemical pesticide reduction but threatens biological pollution of the environment: crops genetically engineered to express Bacillus thuringiensis. Analysis of user workshops in Chicago and Memphis during the summer of 1999 suggests that difficulties may lie not with the seeds themselves but with the adoption of management practices that preserve the pesticidal capabilities of the plants.The products of the new agricultural biotechnology have left the lab, passed through farmers' fields, and now line grocers' shelves. Estimates suggest that genetically engineered crops cover one quarter, or 90 million acres, of U.S. cropland, with over 35% of all corn, 55% of all soybeans, and nearly half of all cotton being genetically engineered. Estimates also suggest that over two thirds of the food bought by average consumers, unbeknownst to them, contains genetically engineered components ("Seeds of Change," 1999). Additionally, many other genetically engineered products have undergone regulatory review and are entering the market.The great majority of genetically engineered crops are altered for herbicide tolerance and pest resistance. These characteristics benefit farmers by enhancing production and benefit the public through reduced chemical input use. At a time when the range of registered pesticides is being reduced by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA), the health and environmental benefits of genetically engineered crops are being touted by the corporations producing them and welcomed

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract