IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v6y2016i1p3-d62011.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability Assessment of Plant Protection Strategies in Swiss Winter Wheat and Potato Production

Author

Listed:
  • Patrik Mouron

    (Agroscope, Institute for Sustainability Sciences, Reckenholzstrasse 191, Zürich CH-8046, Switzerland)

  • Chiara Calabrese

    (Agroscope, Institute for Sustainability Sciences, Reckenholzstrasse 191, Zürich CH-8046, Switzerland)

  • Stève Breitenmoser

    (Agroscope, Institute for Plant Production Sciences, Route de Duillier 50, P.O. Box 1012, Nyon 1 CH-1260, Switzerland)

  • Simon Spycher

    (Agroscope, Institute for Plant Production Sciences, Schloss 1, P.O. Box, Wädenswil CH-8820, Switzerland)

  • Robert Baur

    (Agroscope, Institute for Plant Production Sciences, Schloss 1, P.O. Box, Wädenswil CH-8820, Switzerland)

Abstract

Production of arable crops in Switzerland is subsidized for services performed within the Proof of Ecological Performance (PEP) program, the crop protection part of which is based on IPM principles. Within PEP, chemical insect control must rely on those approved insecticides that are deemed harmless for beneficial arthropods. Approved insecticides potentially impacting beneficial arthropods may also be applied, but only if unavoidable and with an official permit. In order to assess the ecological and economic sustainability of this PEP program, a reference insecticide strategy illustrating the current PEP requirements was compared with other strategies. For this purpose, a sustainability assessment taking account of ecotoxicological risks and economic viability in addition to the preservation of beneficial arthropods was performed according to the SustainOS methodology. The results show that the one-off use of Audienz (spinosad) to control cereal leaf beetle ( Oulema melanopus )—a key pest in winter wheat—would significantly improve sustainability vis-à-vis the reference ( Nomolt (teflubenzuron) plus Biscaya (thiacloprid)). However, in the case of the Colorado potato beetle ( Leptinotarsa decemlineata ), in potato crops, where Audienz is considered the reference, no alternative would exhibit better sustainability. Moreover, the study shows that strategies using Novodor ( Bacillus thuringiensis ) protect beneficial species well but have the drawbacks of increased yield risk and higher costs. The conclusions drawn from these analyses allow recommendations for modifications of the PEP requirements for these two pest insects. The SustainOS methodology, a multi-step process combining expert knowledge with quantitative assessments including a sensitivity analysis of key target parameters and a rule-based aggregation of assessment results, yielded valuable insights into the sustainability of different crop protection strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrik Mouron & Chiara Calabrese & Stève Breitenmoser & Simon Spycher & Robert Baur, 2016. "Sustainability Assessment of Plant Protection Strategies in Swiss Winter Wheat and Potato Production," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-17, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:6:y:2016:i:1:p:3-:d:62011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/6/1/3/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/6/1/3/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keating, B. A. & McCown, R. L., 2001. "Advances in farming systems analysis and intervention," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(2-3), pages 555-579.
    2. Mouron, Patrik & Heijne, Bart & Naef, Andreas & Strassemeyer, Jörn & Hayer, Frank & Avilla, Jesus & Alaphilippe, Aude & Höhn, Heinrich & Hernandez, José & Mack, Gabriele & Gaillard, Gérard & Solé, Joa, 2012. "Sustainability assessment of crop protection systems: SustainOS methodology and its application for apple orchards," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-15.
    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. Zouhair Rached & Ali Chebil & Chokri Thabet, 2022. "Effect of Farm Size on Sustainability Dimensions: Case of Durum Wheat in Northern Tunisia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Yuying Yang & Yubin Wang, 2024. "The Impact of Government Subsidies and Quality Certification on Farmers’ Adoption of Green Pest Control Technologies," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.

    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. Hutchings, Timothy R., 2009. "A financial analysis of the effect of the mix of crop and sheep enterprises on the risk profile of dryland farms in south-eastern Australia – Part 1," AFBM Journal, Australasian Farm Business Management Network, vol. 6(01), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Nadine Andrieu & Patrick Dugue & Pierre-Yves Le Gal & Marine Rueff & Noemie Schaller & Aristide Sempore, 2012. "Validating a Whole Farm Modelling with Stakeholders: Evidence from a West African Case," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 4(9), pages 159-159, July.
    3. Nuthall, Peter L., 2012. "The intuitive world of farmers – The case of grazing management systems and experts," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 65-73.
    4. Petr Marada & Jan Cukor & Rostislav Linda & Zdeněk Vacek & Stanislav Vacek & František Havránek, 2019. "Extensive Orchards in the Agricultural Landscape: Effective Protection against Fraying Damage Caused by Roe Deer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-12, July.
    5. Meinke, H. & Baethgen, W. E. & Carberry, P. S. & Donatelli, M. & Hammer, G. L. & Selvaraju, R. & Stockle, C. O., 2001. "Increasing profits and reducing risks in crop production using participatory systems simulation approaches," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(2-3), pages 493-513.
    6. M. Lefebvre & C. Biguzzi & E. Ginon & S. Gomez-y-Paloma & S. R. H. Langrell & S. Marette & G. Mateu & A. Sutan, 2017. "Mandatory integrated pest management in the European Union: experimental insights on consumers’ reactions," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 25-54, July.
    7. Bobojonov, Ihtiyor & Aw-Hassan, Aden, 2014. "Impacts of climate change on farm income security in Central Asia: An integrated modeling approach," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 188, pages 245-255.
    8. Poussin, Jean-Christophe & Diallo, Youssouf & Legoupil, Jean-Claude, 2006. "Improved collective decision-making in action for irrigated rice farmers in the Senegal River Valley," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 299-323, September.
    9. Sterk, B. & van Ittersum, M.K. & Leeuwis, C. & Rossing, W.A.H. & van Keulen, H. & van de Ven, G.W.J., 2006. "Finding niches for whole-farm design models - contradictio in terminis?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 211-228, February.
    10. Detlefsen, Nina K. & Jensen, Allan Leck, 2007. "Modelling optimal crop sequences using network flows," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 566-572, May.
    11. Petit, T. & Martel, G. & Vertès, F. & Couvreur, S., 2019. "Long-term maintenance of grasslands on dairy farms is associated with redesign and hybridisation of practices, motivated by farmers' perceptions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 435-448.
    12. Goossens, Y. & Annaert, B. & De Tavernier, J. & Mathijs, E. & Keulemans, W. & Geeraerd, A., 2017. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) for apple orchard production systems including low and high productive years in conventional, integrated and organic farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 81-93.
    13. Lavik, Ming Su & Hardaker, J. Brian & Lien, Gudbrand & Berge, Therese W., 2020. "A multi-attribute decision analysis of pest management strategies for Norwegian crop farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    14. Villano, Renato & Fleming, Euan & Fleming, Pauline, 2010. "Evidence of farm-level synergies in mixed-farming systems in the Australian Wheat-Sheep Zone," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 146-152, March.
    15. Power, Brendan & Cacho, Oscar J, 2014. "Identifying risk-efficient strategies using stochastic frontier analysis and simulation: An application to irrigated cropping in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 23-32.
    16. Schönhart, Martin & Schauppenlehner, Thomas & Schmid, Erwin & Muhar, Andreas, 2011. "Integration of bio-physical and economic models to analyze management intensity and landscape structure effects at farm and landscape level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 122-134, February.
    17. Westbrooke, Victoria & Nuthall, Peter, 2017. "Why small farms persist? The influence of farmers’ characteristics on farm growth and development. The case of smaller dairy farmers in NZ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(4), October.
    18. Jami L. Dixon & Lindsay C. Stringer & Andrew J. Challinor, 2014. "Farming System Evolution and Adaptive Capacity: Insights for Adaptation Support," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-33, February.
    19. Nguyen, Nam C. & Wegener, Malcolm K. & Russell, Iean W., 2007. "Decision support systems in Australian agriculture: state of the art and future development," AFBM Journal, Australasian Farm Business Management Network, vol. 4(01-2), pages 1-7.
    20. Kaufmann, Brigitte A., 2011. "Second-order cybernetics as a tool to understand why pastoralists do what they do," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(9), pages 655-665.

    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:gam:jagris:v:6:y:2016:i:1:p:3-:d:62011. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.