Pesticides, external costs and policy options for Thai agriculture

This study addresses the questions of how to estimate the external costs of agricultural pesticide use and how to disaggregate these costs to particular chemicals and farm production systems. Using the case of Thailand-a lower-middle income country with an export-oriented agriculture and an annual g...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Suwanna Praneetvatakul, Pepijn Schreinemachers, Piyatat Pananurak, Prasnee Tipraqsa
Format: Journal
Published: 2018
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84871749558&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/48091
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Chiang Mai University
id th-cmuir.6653943832-48091
record_format dspace
spelling th-cmuir.6653943832-480912018-04-25T08:47:36Z Pesticides, external costs and policy options for Thai agriculture Suwanna Praneetvatakul Pepijn Schreinemachers Piyatat Pananurak Prasnee Tipraqsa This study addresses the questions of how to estimate the external costs of agricultural pesticide use and how to disaggregate these costs to particular chemicals and farm production systems. Using the case of Thailand-a lower-middle income country with an export-oriented agriculture and an annual growth in pesticide use of about 10%, we estimate the external costs of pesticide use for the period 1997-2010 by applying the Pesticide Environmental Accounting (PEA) tool and compare the estimates to an accounting of actual costs for two years. We also use the tool to estimate the external costs of two distinct production systems of rice and intensive horticulture. Using the PEA tool, we estimate the average external costs of pesticide use in Thailand to be USD 27.1/ha of agricultural land in 2010; yet the actual cost estimate for the same year is only USD 18.7/ha. This difference leads us to discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the PEA approach. The negative externalities of pesticide use could be reduced by giving farmers a financial incentive to use fewer pesticides, for instance by introducing an environmental tax. We argue that for such instrument to be effective, it needs to be combined with supportive measures to change on-farm practices through awareness-raising about the adverse effects of pesticides and introducing farmers to non-chemical alternatives to manage their pest problems. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. 2018-04-25T08:47:36Z 2018-04-25T08:47:36Z 2013-03-01 Journal 18736416 14629011 2-s2.0-84871749558 10.1016/j.envsci.2012.10.019 https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84871749558&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/48091
institution Chiang Mai University
building Chiang Mai University Library
country Thailand
collection CMU Intellectual Repository
description This study addresses the questions of how to estimate the external costs of agricultural pesticide use and how to disaggregate these costs to particular chemicals and farm production systems. Using the case of Thailand-a lower-middle income country with an export-oriented agriculture and an annual growth in pesticide use of about 10%, we estimate the external costs of pesticide use for the period 1997-2010 by applying the Pesticide Environmental Accounting (PEA) tool and compare the estimates to an accounting of actual costs for two years. We also use the tool to estimate the external costs of two distinct production systems of rice and intensive horticulture. Using the PEA tool, we estimate the average external costs of pesticide use in Thailand to be USD 27.1/ha of agricultural land in 2010; yet the actual cost estimate for the same year is only USD 18.7/ha. This difference leads us to discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the PEA approach. The negative externalities of pesticide use could be reduced by giving farmers a financial incentive to use fewer pesticides, for instance by introducing an environmental tax. We argue that for such instrument to be effective, it needs to be combined with supportive measures to change on-farm practices through awareness-raising about the adverse effects of pesticides and introducing farmers to non-chemical alternatives to manage their pest problems. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.
format Journal
author Suwanna Praneetvatakul
Pepijn Schreinemachers
Piyatat Pananurak
Prasnee Tipraqsa
spellingShingle Suwanna Praneetvatakul
Pepijn Schreinemachers
Piyatat Pananurak
Prasnee Tipraqsa
Pesticides, external costs and policy options for Thai agriculture
author_facet Suwanna Praneetvatakul
Pepijn Schreinemachers
Piyatat Pananurak
Prasnee Tipraqsa
author_sort Suwanna Praneetvatakul
title Pesticides, external costs and policy options for Thai agriculture
title_short Pesticides, external costs and policy options for Thai agriculture
title_full Pesticides, external costs and policy options for Thai agriculture
title_fullStr Pesticides, external costs and policy options for Thai agriculture
title_full_unstemmed Pesticides, external costs and policy options for Thai agriculture
title_sort pesticides, external costs and policy options for thai agriculture
publishDate 2018
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84871749558&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/48091
_version_ 1681423185247993856