Eco-rating System for Optimizing Pesticide Use at Farm Level. Part 1: Theory and Development

Abstract

A computer-based decision support system is described which aims to encourage and enhance sound environmental management within agriculture. Part of the system focuses on the management of pesticides on the farm, and can help to ensure that the farmer adopts practices which maximise crop production and profitability without jeopardising the environment. The approach taken looks at all aspects of farm pesticide use including crop applications, storage and waste disposal and the use of non-crop pesticides.As a whole, the system can act as a informal environmental management system. An eco-rating is derived by comparing actual farm practices with what is perceived to be best practice for the site, to provide a measure of environmental performance. The first time the method is used these indices act as bench-marks against which the success of future improvements can be judged.The system has three modes of operation. An "assessment mode" seeks to identify strengths and weakness in practices and regulatory compliance and to provide guidance on areas where improvements could be made. In support of this a second mode known as the "technical system" allows the user to explore 'what-if' scenarios in order to identify site specific best practice and aims to provide answers to the issues raised in the assessment mode. The third mode is a fully integrated hypertext information system containing a range of context-sensitively mapped text on agriculture and the environment which can be used on a stand-alone basis or accessed from any part of the software system.

A computer-based informal environmental management system for agriculture

“…The second type refers to those activities which, in whole or in part, are applicable to specific fields and not necessarily the whole farm. For example the application of fertilisers or pesticides (Lewis et al, 1997b) to a specific crop. If quantitative data for individual fields are available then the fate and transport of pollutants can be more readily tracked and a more detailed analysis of environmental performance can be carried out.…”

Farm costs and food miles: An assessment of the full cost of the UK weekly food basket

“…There are many perspectives on what constitutes sustainability and how it can be applied equally across agricultural contexts (Naess, 1992;Dobson, 1999;Pretty et al, 2003a). As a result, a variety of analytical approaches have been developed, including energy accounting (Leach, 1976;Cormack and Metcalfe, 2000;Carlsson-Kanyama et al, 2003), economic valuation of non-marketed goods and services (Pearce and Turner, 1990;Daily, 1997;Costanza et al, 1997;Pretty et al, 2000Pretty et al, , 2001, ecological footprints (Rees, 2003), carbon accounting (Smith and Smith, 2000;Lal et al, 2004), and the use of indicators for sustainability (Lewis et al, 1997;Bailey et al, 1999;OECD, 1998;MAFF, 2000;Caporali et al, 2003).…”

Environmental impact assessment of chemical plant protection in intensive crop production

“…where: Source: Lewis et al (1997); Lewis (1999) Results Figure 1 shows the differences in the number of plant protection treatments between plant groups and the average for the farm. The most treatments were carried out in root crops, followed by oilseed crops, cereals and annual fodder crops.…”