IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/midasp/11813.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fqpa Implementation To Reduce Pesticide Residue Risks: Part I: Agricultural Producer Concerns

Author

Listed:
  • Batie, Sandra S.
  • Swinton, Scott M.
  • Schulz, Mary A.

Abstract

The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) transforms the regulation of pesticide residues on food in the United States. Three changes are prominent. First, under the FQPA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is authorized to develop uniform pesticide residue tolerances for both fresh and processed foods. These tolerances must be based on a conservative standard appropriate for infants and children, rather than the adult-based tolerances that prevailed previously for fresh-market produce. Second, under the FQPA, pesticide registration will be based upon aggregate risk to the most susceptible consumers from all pesticides sharing a common biochemical mode of action in humans. Third, the FQPA expands the scope of health effects included in risk assessment decisions to include potential endocrine and reproductive effects of pesticidal chemicals. As the EPA has moved to develop implementation guidelines for the FQPA, agricultural producers and input suppliers have become concerned about its impact on them. Even if the FQPA's implementation results only in a restriction of the pesticides used on some crops, producers still have four major concerns: (1) the potential loss of farm profitability, especially for farms specializing in fruit and vegetable production; (2) unfair competition if foreign competitors can use pesticides forbidden to domestic producers; (3) the impact of the FQPA on consumer purchases, (i.e., if reduced pesticide use results in more blemishes or lower quality product, will consumers refuse to purchase the product?); and (4) excessive reliance on a few remaining pest control weapons, possibly resulting in accelerated pest resistance. Because these uncertainties potentially impact producers' livelihoods, many argue for a go-slow, long transition for any major changes in the way they farm or the pest control products they use. Competing with these agricultural concerns, however, are a parallel set of concerns, expressed by consumer and environmental groups, that the FQPA's promise to protect infants and children from pesticide risks will be sabotaged by lax or ineffective implementation. There are many uncertainties with respect to the impacts related to alternative FQPA implementation strategies. Research to resolve these concerns is fragmentary and frequently inconclusive. The common element that emerges from this review of producer concerns is: Impacts on producers will depend on how the FQPA is implemented.

Suggested Citation

  • Batie, Sandra S. & Swinton, Scott M. & Schulz, Mary A., 1999. "Fqpa Implementation To Reduce Pesticide Residue Risks: Part I: Agricultural Producer Concerns," Staff Paper Series 11813, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:midasp:11813
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.11813
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/11813/files/sp99-03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.11813?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ollinger, Michael & Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge, 1998. "Innovation and Regulation in the Pesticide Industry," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 15-27, April.
    2. Jorge Fernandez-Cornejo & Sharon Jans & Mark Smith, 1998. "Issues in the Economics of Pesticide Use in Agriculture: A Review of the Empirical Evidence," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(2), pages 462-488.
    3. Dean, Judith M., 1992. "Trade and the environment : a survey of the literature," Policy Research Working Paper Series 966, The World Bank.
    4. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge, 1998. "Environmental and economic consequences of technology adoption: IPM in viticulture," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 145-155, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Marchant, Mary A. & Ballenger, Nicole, 1994. "The Trade And Environmental Debate: Relevant For Southern Agriculture?," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-21, July.
    7. Lohr, Luanne & Salomonsson, Lennart, 2000. "Conversion subsidies for organic production: results from Sweden and lessons for the United States," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 133-146, March.
    8. Dobbs, Thomas L., 1994. "Organic, conventional, and reduced till farming systems: Profitability in the Northern Great Plains," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 9(2), pages 1-2.
    9. Ayer, Harry W. & Conklin, Neilson C., 1990. "ECONOMICS OF AG CHEMICALS: Flawed Methodology and a Conflict of Interest Quagmire," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 5(4), pages 1-4.
    10. Unknown, 1999. "Foreign Agricultural Trade of the United States FATUS Calendar Year 1998 Supplement," Foreign Agricultural Trade of the United States (FATUS) 153172, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Smith, Katherine R., 1994. "Science and social advocacy: a dilemma for policy analysts," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 9(1), pages 1-4.
    12. Welsh, Rick, 1999. "The Economics of Organic Grain and Soybean Production in the Midwestern United States," Policy Studies Program Reports, Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, number 134120, March.
    13. Ervin, David E. & Fox, Glenn, 1998. "Environmental Policy Considerations In The Grain-Livestock Subsectors In Canada, Mexico And The United States," Proceedings of the 4th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop 1998: Economic Harmonization in the Canadian\U.S.\Mexican Grain-Livestock Subsector; 16754, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.
    14. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    15. Unknown, 1996. "Foreign Agricultural Trade of the United States October/November/December 1996," Foreign Agricultural Trade of the United States (FATUS) 164401, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    16. Eom, Young Sook, 1992. "Consumers Respond to Information About Pesticide Residues," Food Review/ National Food Review, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 15(3), October.
    17. Cox, Craig A. & Easter, K. William, 1990. "A Regional Ban Of Alachlor And Atrazine In Southeastern Minnesota: The Economic And Environmental Effects," Staff Papers 13945, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    18. Gary D. Thompson, 1998. "Consumer Demand for Organic Foods: What We Know and What We Need to Know," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1113-1118.
    19. Dobbs, Thomas L., 1998. "Price Premiums for Organic Crops," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 13(2), pages 1-3.
    20. Kuchler, Fred & Ralston, Katherine & Unnevehr, Laurian & Chandran, Ram, 1996. "Pesticide Residues: Reducing Dietary Risks," Agricultural Economic Reports 308432, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    21. Misra, Sukant K. & Huang, Chung L. & Ott, Stephen L., 1991. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Pesticide-Free Fresh Produce," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 16(2), pages 1-10, December.
    22. Osteen, Craig & Kuchler, Fred, 1986. "Potential Bans of Corn and Soybean Pesticides: Economic Implications for Farmers and Consumers," Agricultural Economic Reports 308001, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    23. Mark Phillips & Leonard P. Gianessi, 1998. "An Analysis of the Economic Benefit Provisions of the Food Quality Protection Act," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(2), pages 377-389.
    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. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Greene, Catherine R., 2001. "U.S. Organic Farming Emerges in the 1990s: Adoption of Certified Systems," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33777, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    4. Ball, V. Eldon & Lovell, C.A. Knox & Luu, H. & Nehring, Richard F., 2004. "Incorporating Environmental Impacts in the Measurement of Agricultural Productivity Growth," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 1-25, December.
    5. Owusu, Victor & Owusu, Michael Anifori, 2010. "Measuring Market Potential for Fresh Organic Fruit and Vegetable in Ghana," 2010 AAAE Third Conference/AEASA 48th Conference, September 19-23, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa 95955, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    6. Aubert, M. & Bouhsina, Z. & Codron, J.M. & Rousset, S., 2013. "Pesticide safety risk, food chain organization, and the adoption of sustainable farming practices. The case of Moroccan early tomatoes," Working Papers MoISA 201304, UMR MoISA : Montpellier Interdisciplinary center on Sustainable Agri-food systems (social and nutritional sciences): CIHEAM-IAMM, CIRAD, INRAE, L'Institut Agro, Montpellier SupAgro, IRD - Montpellier, France.
    7. Haixiao Huang, Walter C. Labys, 2002. "Environment and trade: a review of issues and methods," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1/2), pages 100-160.
    8. McFadden, Jonathan R. & Huffman, Wallace E., 2017. "Willingness-to-pay for natural, organic, and conventional foods: The effects of information and meaningful labels," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 214-232.
    9. Kuchler, Fred & Ralston, Katherine & Unnevehr, Laurian J., 1997. "Reducing pesticide risks to US food consumers: can agricultural research help?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 119-132, April.
    10. Rauscher, Michael, 2001. "International trade, foreign investment, and the environment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 29, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    11. Emiel Wubben, 1999. "What's in it for us? Or: the impact of environmental legislation on competitiveness," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(2), pages 95-107, March.
    12. Ervin, David E. & Fox, Glenn, 1998. "Environmental Policy Considerations In The Grain-Livestock Subsectors In Canada, Mexico And The United States," Proceedings of the 4th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop 1998: Economic Harmonization in the Canadian\U.S.\Mexican Grain-Livestock Subsector; 16754, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.
    13. Frankel, Jeffrey A., 2009. "Environmental Effects of International Trade," Scholarly Articles 4481652, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    14. Teresa Serra & David Zilberman & José M. Gil, 2008. "Differential uncertainties and risk attitudes between conventional and organic producers: the case of Spanish arable crop farmers," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(2), pages 219-229, September.
    15. C. Rendleman & Kenneth Reinert & James Tobey, 1995. "Market-based systems for reducing chemical use in agriculture in the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 51-70, January.
    16. Schrock, Rebecca, 2010. "Determinants Of The Demand For Organic And Conventional Fresh Milk In Germany– An Econometric Analysis," 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany 116387, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Steven C. Blank & Gary D. Thompson, 2004. "Can/Should/Will A Niche Become the Norm? Organic Agriculture's Short Past and Long Future," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 22(4), pages 483-503, October.
    18. Xu, Xinpeng, 1999. "Do Stringent Environmental Regulations Reduce the International Competitiveness of Environmentally Sensitive Goods? A Global Perspective," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 1215-1226, July.
    19. Wier, Mette & Hansen, Lars Gaarn & Andersen, Laura Mørch, 2003. "Consumer preferences for organic foods," MPRA Paper 60539, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Killinger, Sebastian & Schmidt, Carsten, 1997. "Nationale Umweltpolitik und internationale Integration: Theoretische Ansätze im Überblick," Discussion Papers, Series I 289, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.

    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:ags:midasp:11813. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/damsuus.html .

    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.