IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v22y1997i2p133-144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Financial incentives and pesticide use

Author

Listed:
  • Zilberman, David
  • Millock, Katti

Abstract

This paper argues that the current pesticide regulatory system is inefficient. An elaborate set of registration requirements has led to high costs of new pesticides. The current system does not provide any incentives for decreasing its pesticide use. The implementation of financial incentives to control pesticide use is difficult since damage from pesticide use depends on locational factors, timing, and manner of application. An efficient pesticide tax scheme requires detailed monitoring and reporting of pesticide use by farmers. Improved monitoring systems will enable differentiated pesticide taxes according to application technology, and such differentiated taxation will encourage the adoption of precision technologies that reduce pesticide use. Proceeds from pesticide taxes may have a role in financing research and education in Integrated Pest Management methods, given the high development costs and advanced management skills demanded by many non-chemical control methods. The transition to efficient financial incentives will be gradual in the near future, and it may be useful to use financial incentives to induce improvement in pesticide use efficiency and reduce pesticides use levels.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Zilberman, David & Millock, Katti, 1997. "Financial incentives and pesticide use," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 133-144, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:22:y:1997:i:2:p:133-144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306-9192(97)00004-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. E. Douglas Beach & Gerald A. Carlson, 1993. "A Hedonic Analysis of Herbicides: Do User Safety and Water Quality Matter?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 612-623.
    2. Fred C. White & Michael E. Wetzstein, 1995. "Market Effects of Cotton Integrated Pest Management," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(3), pages 602-612.
    3. Jorge Fernandez-Cornejo & Sharon Jans, 1995. "Quality-Adjusted Price and Quantity Indices for Pesticides," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(3), pages 645-659.
    4. Buchanan, James M & Tullock, Gordon, 1975. "Polluters' Profits and Political Response: Direct Controls Versus Taxes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 139-147, March.
    5. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fadhuile, Adelaide & Lemarie, Stephane & Pirotte, Alain, 2011. "Pesticides Uses in Crop Production: What Can We Learn from French Farmers Practices?," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103654, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Finger, Robert & Möhring, Niklas & Dalhaus, Tobias & Böcker, Thomas, 2017. "Revisiting Pesticide Taxation Schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 263-266.
    3. Jacquet, Florence & Butault, Jean-Pierre & Guichard, Laurence, 2011. "An economic analysis of the possibility of reducing pesticides in French field crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1638-1648, July.
    4. Thomas Böcker & Robert Finger, 2016. "European Pesticide Tax Schemes in Comparison: An Analysis of Experiences and Developments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-22, April.
    5. Swinton, Scott M. & Batie, Sandra S. & Schulz, Mary A., 1999. "Fqpa Implementation To Reduce Pesticide Residue Risks: Part Ii: Implementation Alternatives And Strategies," Staff Paper Series 11488, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    6. Perry, Edward D. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2020. "Neonicotinoids in U.S. maize: Insecticide substitution effects and environmental risk," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    7. Alfons Weersink & John R. Livernois & Jason F. Shogren & James S. Shortle, 1998. "Economic Instruments and Environmental Policy in Agriculture," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 24(3), pages 309-327, September.
    8. Xiuling Ding & Apurbo Sarkar & Lipeng Li & Hua Li & Qian Lu, 2022. "Effects of Market Incentives and Livelihood Dependence on Farmers’ Multi-Stage Pesticide Application Behavior—A Case Study of Four Provinces in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-19, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sturm, Daniel & Ulph, Alistair, 2002. "Environment, trade, political economy and imperfect information: a survey," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0204, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    2. Peifang Yang & Daniel T. Kaffine, 2016. "Community-Based Tradable Permits for Localized Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 773-788, December.
    3. Don Fullerton, 2011. "Six Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(6), pages 923-929, June.
    4. Lambert Schoonbeek & Frans Vries, 2009. "Environmental taxes and industry monopolization," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 94-106, August.
    5. Pezzey, John C.V. & Jotzo, Frank, 2010. "Tax-Versus-Trading and Free Emission Shares as Issues for Climate Policy Design," Research Reports 95049, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    6. Daugbjerg, Carsten & Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard, 2001. "Designing green taxes in a political context: From optimal to feasible environmental regulation," Working Papers 01-17, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
    7. Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Problem of the Commons: Still Unsettled after 100 Years," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 81-108, February.
    8. Yu-Bong Lai, 2009. "Is a Double Dividend Better than a Single Dividend?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 165(2), pages 342-363, June.
    9. David Anthoff & Robert Hahn, 2010. "Government failure and market failure: on the inefficiency of environmental and energy policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 26(2), pages 197-224, Summer.
    10. Meleo, Linda, 2014. "On the determinants of industrial competitiveness: The European Union emission trading scheme and the Italian paper industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 535-546.
    11. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2019. "Policy Evolution under the Clean Air Act," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 27-50, Fall.
    12. Bovenberg, A. Lans & Goulder, Lawrence H., 2002. "Environmental taxation and regulation," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 23, pages 1471-1545, Elsevier.
    13. Ko, Il-Dong, 1988. "Issues in the control of stock externality problems with inflexible policy measures," ISU General Staff Papers 198801010800009859, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    14. Sturm, Daniel & Ulph, Alistair, 2002. "Environment, trade, political economy and imperfect information: a survey," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 204, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    15. Rauscher, Michael, 2001. "International trade, foreign investment, and the environment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 29, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    16. Morrison Paul, Catherine J. & Ball, V. Eldon & Felthoven, Ronald G. & Nehring, Richard F., 2000. "Effective Costs And Chemical Use In U.S. Agricultural Production: Benefits And Costs Of Using The Environment As A "Free" Input," Working Papers 11986, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    17. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2002. "Agriculture and the environment," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 23, pages 1249-1313, Elsevier.
    18. Don Fullerton, 2001. "A Framework to Compare Environmental Policies," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 68(2), pages 224-248, October.
    19. Juan Carlos Bárcena‐Ruiz & María Begoña Garzón, 2022. "Environmental policy instruments and ownership of firms," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(4), pages 385-408, July.
    20. Harstad, Bård & Eskeland, Gunnar S., 2010. "Trading for the future: Signaling in permit markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(9-10), pages 749-760, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:22:y:1997:i:2:p:133-144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.