Risk‐cost‐benefit analysis of atrazine in drinking water from agricultural activities and policy implications

Abstract

[1] This study provides an improved methodology for investigating the trade-offs between the health risks and economic benefits of using atrazine in the agricultural sector by incorporating public attitude to pesticide management in the analysis. Regression models are developed to predict finished water atrazine concentration in high-risk community water supplies in the United States. The predicted finished water atrazine concentrations are then used in a health risk assessment. The computed health risks are compared with the total economic surplus in the U.S. corn market for different atrazine application rates using estimated demand and supply functions developed in this work. Analysis of different scenarios with consumer price premiums for chemical-free and reduced-chemical corn indicate that if the society is willing to pay a price premium, risks can be reduced without a large reduction in the total economic surplus and net benefits may be higher. The results also show that this methodology provides an improved scientific framework for future decision making and policy evaluation in pesticide management.Citation: Tesfamichael, A. A., A. J. Caplan, and J. J. Kaluarachchi (2005), Risk-cost-benefit analysis of atrazine in drinking water from agricultural activities and policy implications, Water Resour. Res., 41, W05015,

Does Federal Crop Insurance Make Environmental Externalities from Agriculture Worse?

“…The elasticity of contamination for fertilizer (column 4) is from Li et al (2006) and represents the percent increase in nitrogen in tile drainage water for a percent increase in fertilizer application. The elasticity of contamination for chemical expenses refers to the percent increase in atrazine in waterways resulting from a one percent increase in atrazine application as estimated by Tesfamichael et al (2005). Column 5 comes from multiplying column 3 with column 4.…”

“…Supposing the increase in chemical expenses is associated with a similar increase in quantity of pesticide applied, our estimate multiplied by that of Tesfamichael et al (2005) suggests a 1.1 percent (=2.2 percent x 0.5 percent) increase in the concentration of pesticide in streams.…”

“…The implied (upper-bound) elasticity between crop insurance coverage and fertilizer loss Using data from the National Water Quality Assessment program, Tesfamichael et al (2005) estimate that a 1 percent increase in the application rate of atrazine led to a 0.5 percent increase in the concentration of atrazine in streams. (Atrazine is a commonly used pesticides and was the second most commonly found pesticide in a nation-wide survey by the EPA (U.S. EPA, 1990)).…”

Prediction of Herbicides Concentration in Streams

“…Because of these characteristics, fuzzy logic may be a more suitable method for diffuse pollution forecasting than the usual regression modeling techniques used by many researchers (e,g. Goolsby and Battaglin (1993); Larson and Gilliom (2001);and Tesfamichael et al (2005) etc.) for estimation of diffuse pollution concentration in streams or other water bodies.…”

“…), amount of agricultural chemicals applied, or percentage of land planted affect agricultural chemical concentration and mass transport in streams. The general form of model that simulates the concentration measurement in a watershed can be represented by (Tesfamichael et al, 2005) …”