ABSTRACT
Excessive agricultural nitrogen use causes environmental problems globally1, to an extent that it has been suggested that a safe planetary boundary has been exceeded2. Earlier estimates for the planetary nitrogen boundary3,4, however, did not account for the spatial variability in both ecosystems' sensitivity to nitrogen pollution and agricultural nitrogen losses. Here we use a spatially explicit model to establish regional boundaries for agricultural nitrogen surplus from thresholds for eutrophication of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and nitrate in groundwater. We estimate regional boundaries for agricultural nitrogen pollution and find both overuse and room for intensification of agricultural nitrogen. The aggregated global surplus boundary with respect to all thresholds is 43 megatonnes of nitrogen per year, which is 64 per cent lower than the current (2010) nitrogen surplus (119 megatonnes of nitrogen per year). Allowing the nitrogen surplus to increase to close yield gaps in regions where environmental thresholds are not exceeded lifts the planetary nitrogen boundary to 57 megatonnes of nitrogen per year. Feeding the world without trespassing regional and planetary nitrogen boundaries requires large increases in nitrogen use efficiencies accompanied by mitigation of non-agricultural nitrogen sources such as sewage water. This asks for coordinated action that recognizes the heterogeneity of agricultural systems, non-agricultural nitrogen losses and environmental vulnerabilities.
Subject(s)
Agriculture , Ecosystem , Environmental Pollution , Groundwater , Nitrogen , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/methods , Earth, Planet , Environmental Pollutants/analysis , Environmental Pollutants/supply & distribution , Environmental Pollution/analysis , Environmental Pollution/legislation & jurisprudence , Environmental Pollution/prevention & control , Eutrophication , Groundwater/chemistry , Nitrates/analysis , Nitrogen/analysis , Sewage/chemistry , Water/chemistry , Food SupplySubject(s)
Agriculture , Biodiversity , Conservation of Natural Resources , Agriculture/economics , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/methods , Agriculture/trends , Conservation of Natural Resources/economics , Conservation of Natural Resources/legislation & jurisprudence , Conservation of Natural Resources/methods , Conservation of Natural Resources/trends , Environmental Policy/economics , Environmental Policy/legislation & jurisprudence , Environmental Policy/trends , Risk Assessment , Organic Agriculture , AnimalsABSTRACT
The Amazon is Brazil's greatest natural resource and invaluable to the rest of the world as a buffer against climate change. The recent election of Brazil's president brought disputes over development plans for the region back into the spotlight. Historically, the development model for the Amazon has focused on exploitation of natural resources, resulting in environmental degradation, particularly deforestation. Although considerable attention has focused on the long-term global cost of "losing the Amazon," too little attention has focused on the emergence and reemergence of vector-borne diseases that directly impact the local population, with spillover effects to other neighboring areas. We discuss the impact of Amazon development models on human health, with a focus on vector-borne disease risk. We outline policy actions that could mitigate these negative impacts while creating opportunities for environmentally sensitive economic activities.
Subject(s)
Agriculture/methods , Conservation of Natural Resources/methods , Vector Borne Diseases/epidemiology , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Brazil , Climate Change , Conservation of Natural Resources/legislation & jurisprudence , Disease/etiology , Ecosystem , Forests , Humans , Vector Borne Diseases/transmissionSubject(s)
Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/methods , CRISPR-Cas Systems/genetics , Food, Genetically Modified/classification , Gene Editing/legislation & jurisprudence , Public Opinion , Trust , Agriculture/standards , Animals , Asparagine/biosynthesis , Crops, Agricultural/genetics , Crops, Agricultural/standards , Food, Genetically Modified/standards , Gene Editing/classification , Gene Editing/standards , Government Regulation , Triticum/genetics , Triticum/metabolism , United KingdomABSTRACT
The global demand for palm oil has grown rapidly over the past several decades. Much of the output expansion has occurred in carbon- and biodiversity-rich forest lands of Malaysia and Indonesia (M&I), contributing to record levels of terrestrial carbon emissions and biodiversity loss. This has led to a variety of voluntary and mandatory regulatory actions, as well as calls for limits on palm oil imports from M&I. This paper offers a comprehensive, global assessment of the economic and environmental consequences of alternative policies aimed at limiting deforestation from oil palm expansion in M&I. It highlights the challenges of limiting forest and biodiversity loss in the presence of market-mediated spillovers into related oilseed and agricultural commodity and factor markets, both in M&I and overseas. Indeed, limiting palm oil production or consumption is unlikely to halt deforestation in M&I in the absence of active forest conservation incentives. Policies aimed at restricting palm oil production in M&I also have broader consequences for the economy, including significant impacts on consumer prices, real wages, and welfare, that vary among different global regions. A crucial distinction is whether the initiative is undertaken domestically, in which case the M&I region could benefit, or by major palm oil importers, in which case M&I loses income. Nonetheless, all policies considered here pass the social welfare test of global carbon dioxide mitigation benefits exceeding their costs.
Subject(s)
Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Arecaceae/growth & development , Commerce , Conservation of Natural Resources/legislation & jurisprudence , Crop Production/legislation & jurisprudence , Palm Oil/supply & distribution , Biodiversity , Crop Production/economics , Forests , Indonesia , MalaysiaSubject(s)
Conservation of Natural Resources/legislation & jurisprudence , Conservation of Natural Resources/methods , Ecosystem , Environmental Policy/legislation & jurisprudence , Goals , International Cooperation/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Animals , Biodiversity , Congresses as Topic , Endangered Species/legislation & jurisprudence , Forestry/legislation & jurisprudence , Rome , Species SpecificityABSTRACT
The waste generated in the production of wine and grape juice is characterized by a high concentration of organic matter, when properly treated, can serve as sustainable strategies for its use and destination, and among these, the production of biocompost. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the process of composting grape marc, sheep manure, and mango leaves, evaluating in the biocompost its physical-chemical, nutritional and microbiological characteristics for use in agriculture. The composting pile assembly followed the proportion of 30% of sheep manure as nitrogenous material and 70% of carbon-rich material (divided into 50% of grape marc and 20% of hose leaves), the initial C/N ratio was 33:1, and the process lasted 120 days according to legislation. When evaluating the results, the process occurred in an accelerated manner, where at 30 days the biocompost was already stabilized, and at the end of the process (120 days) it presented a C/N ratio of 5.85, as well as acceptable levels for the macronutrients K and P, and without risk of phytotoxicity, and could be used as organic fertilizer or as soil conditioner, reducing environmentally inadequate destination and generating savings with their reinsertion in the production chain.
Subject(s)
Agriculture/methods , Composting/methods , Industrial Waste , Wine , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Animals , Brazil , Carbon/analysis , Composting/legislation & jurisprudence , Industrial Waste/analysis , Mangifera , Manure , Nitrogen/analysis , Sheep , VitisABSTRACT
An intended generalized ban on the "introduction and use of transgenic seeds" has been announced by the Mexican government, which, unlike the other agricultural programs under this administration, lacks a budget and rules of operation. In this policy brief we consider scenarios of implementing such an intended ban, de-regulating the use of genetically modified crops, or an intermediate scenario under the existing biosafety regulations. We recommend maintaining the status quo given its potential contributions to food and environmental security, in addition to a better economic outlook. However, a greater impulse needs to be given by the federal government to foment the domestic development of GM crops that are pertinent for Mexican agri-food needs, in addition to funding the development and implementation of various agro-ecological practices that increase biodiversity in food production units.
Subject(s)
Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Biotechnology/legislation & jurisprudence , Crops, Agricultural/genetics , Food Safety/methods , Food, Genetically Modified/standards , Plants, Genetically Modified/genetics , Seeds/genetics , Humans , Mexico , Risk Assessment , Seeds/growth & developmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pesticide self-poisoning is a common means of suicide in India. Banning highly hazardous pesticides from agricultural use has been successful in reducing total suicide numbers in several South Asian countries without affecting agricultural output. Here, we describe national and state-level regulation of highly hazardous pesticides and explore how they might relate to suicide rates across India. METHODS: Information on pesticide regulation was collated from agriculture departments of the central government and all 29 state governments (excluding union territories). National and state-level data on suicides from 1995 to 2015 were obtained from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). We used joinpoint analysis and negative binomial regression to investigate the trends in suicide rates nationally and in Kerala, in view of the robust measures Kerala has taken to restrict a number of HHPs, to identify any effect on suicides. RESULTS: As of October 2019, 318 pesticides were registered for use in India, of which 18 were extremely (Class Ia) or highly (Class Ib) hazardous according to World Health Organization toxicity criteria. Despite many highly hazardous pesticides still being available, several bans have been implemented during the period studied. In our quantitative analyses we focused on the permanent bans in Kerala in 2005 (of endosulfan) and 2011 (of 14 other pesticides); and nationally in 2011 (of endosulfan). NCRB data indicate that pesticides were used in 441,918 reported suicides in India from 1995 to 2015, 90.3% of which occurred in 11 of the 29 states. There was statistical evidence of lower than expected rates of pesticide suicides (rate ratio [RR] 0.52, 95% CI 0.49-0.54) and total suicides nationally by 2014 (0.90, 0.87-0.93) after the 2011 endosulfan ban. In Kerala, there was a lower than expected rate of pesticide suicides (0.45, 0.42-0.49), but no change to the already decreasing trend in total suicides (1.02, 1.00-1.05) after the 2011 ban of 14 pesticides. The 2005 ban on endosulfan showed a similar effect - lower than expected pesticide suicides (0.79, 0.64-0.99), but no change to the decreasing trend of total suicides (0.97, 0.93-1.02) in 2010. There was no evidence of a decline in agricultural outputs following the bans. CONCLUSION: Highly hazardous pesticides continue to be used in India and pesticide suicide remains a serious public health problem. However, some pesticide bans do appear to have impacted previous trends in the rates of both pesticide suicides and all suicides. Comprehensive national bans of highly hazardous pesticides could lead to a reduction in suicides across India, in addition to reduced occupational poisoning, with minimal effects on agricultural yield.
Subject(s)
Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Government Regulation , Pesticides/poisoning , Suicide/trends , Humans , India , State GovernmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Sri Lanka has reduced its overall suicide rate by 70% over the last two decades through means restriction, through a series of government regulations and bans removing highly hazardous pesticides from agriculture. We aimed to identify the key pesticide(s) now responsible for suicides in rural Sri Lanka to provide data for further pesticide regulation. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of data collected prospectively during a cluster randomized controlled trial in the Anuradhapura district of Sri Lanka from 2011 to 16. The identity of pesticides responsible for suicides were sought from medical or judicial medical notes, coroners' records, and the person's family. Trend analysis was done using a regression analysis with curve estimation to identify relative importance of key pesticides. RESULTS: We identified 337 suicidal deaths. Among them, the majority 193 (57.3%) were due to ingestion of pesticides while 82 (24.3%) were due to hanging. A specific pesticide was identified in 105 (54.4%) of the pesticide suicides. Ingestion of carbosulfan or profenofos was responsible for 59 (56.2%) of the suicides with a known pesticide and 17.5% of all suicides. The increasing trend of suicides due to carbosulfan and profenofos over time was statistically significant (R square 0.846, F 16.541, p 0.027). CONCLUSION: Ingestion of pesticides remains the most important means of suicides in rural Sri Lanka. The pesticides that were once responsible for most pesticide suicides have now been replaced by carbosulfan and profenofos. Their regulation and replacement in agriculture with less hazardous pesticides will further reduce the incidence of both pesticide and overall suicides in rural Sri Lanka.
Subject(s)
Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Pesticides/poisoning , Rural Population , Suicide/statistics & numerical data , Carbamates/poisoning , Eating , Government Regulation , Humans , Organothiophosphates/toxicity , Prospective Studies , Sri Lanka/epidemiologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Pesticides are organic compounds widely used in modern agriculture, being relevant for helping plantations and increasing food production. The banana, a fruit with oriental origin, stands out for being widely produced in tropical and subtropical regions which, like other matrices, is susceptible to pest action. This review aims to evaluate the presence of pesticides in bananas according to Brazilian, European and Codex legislation. METHODS: Four databases, ScienceDirect, SciELO, PubMed and Springer, were used to find relevant articles in the literature addressing methods for the determination of pesticide residues in bananas using the terms "banana", "chromatography", "pesticides" and "determination". The search stages included reading abstracts and titles, reading the full text, extracting data and analyzing data from eligible articles. The search was restricted to original research articles published in English from 2008 to 2018. RESULTS: 404 articles were found from the initial research, with only 15 studies being considered eligible for this review. Mass spectrometry is the most widely used detection technique. 5 articles were seen to use a multiresidue method to analyze only bananas (pulp), and from these, only 2 studies used methods to analyze the pulp and peel. The articles analyzed 172 samples, with 59.3% of these being conducted in Europe, 32.5% being conducted in Asia and only 8.1% in South America. A total of 79.1%, 32.4% and 42.6% of samples were unsatisfactory according to the Brazilian, European and Codex legislation, respectively, with these samples being contaminated with pesticide residues. CONCLUSION: This review presents the scarcity of articles aimed at identifying pesticide residues in bananas and the urgency of checking the quality of the fruit that reaches the population. The MRLs allowed by different legislations have clear divergences that do not ensure the lowest concentration values that guarantee consumer safety.
Subject(s)
Food Contamination/analysis , Musa/chemistry , Pesticides/analysis , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/organization & administration , Food Safety , Fruit/chemistry , Pesticide Residues/analysis , Pesticide Residues/standardsABSTRACT
Crop production systems have adopted cost-effective, sustainable and environmentally friendly agricultural practices to improve crop yields and the quality of food derived from plants. Approaches such as genetic selection and the creation of varieties displaying favorable traits such as disease and drought resistance have been used in the past and continue to be used. However, the use of biostimulants to promote plant growth has increasingly gained attention, and the market size for biostimulants is estimated to reach USD 4.14 billion by 2025. Plant biostimulants are products obtained from different inorganic or organic substances and microorganisms that can improve plant growth and productivity and abate the negative effects of abiotic stresses. They include materials such as protein hydrolysates, amino acids, humic substances, seaweed extracts and food or industrial waste-derived compounds. Fish processing waste products have potential applications as plant biostimulants. This review gives an overview of plant biostimulants with a focus on fish protein hydrolysates and legislation governing the use of plant biostimulants in agriculture.
Subject(s)
Fish Products , Plant Growth Regulators/analysis , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/methods , Fish Proteins/chemistry , Seaweed/chemistryABSTRACT
Agricultural biotechnology continues to generate considerable controversy. We argue that to address this controversy, serious changes to governance are needed. The new wave of genomic tools and products (e.g., CRISPR, gene drives, RNAi, synthetic biology, and genetically modified [GM] insects and fish), provide a particularly useful opportunity to reflect on and revise agricultural biotechnology governance. In response, we present five essential features to advance more socially responsible forms of governance. In presenting these, we hope to stimulate further debate and action towards improved forms of governance, particularly as these new genomic tools and products continue to emerge.
Subject(s)
Agriculture/methods , Biotechnology/ethics , Biotechnology/methods , Genetic Engineering/methods , Agriculture/ethics , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Animals , Animals, Genetically Modified , Biotechnology/legislation & jurisprudence , Community Participation , Crops, Agricultural/genetics , Genetic Engineering/ethics , Genetic Engineering/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Plants, Genetically Modified , Public Health , Risk FactorsSubject(s)
Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Crops, Agricultural/genetics , European Union , Gene Editing/legislation & jurisprudence , Plants, Genetically Modified/genetics , Agriculture/economics , Animals , Belgium , Brazil , Breeding/legislation & jurisprudence , CRISPR-Cas Systems/genetics , Crops, Agricultural/economics , Evaluation Studies as Topic , France , HumansSubject(s)
CRISPR-Cas Systems/genetics , European Union , Food, Genetically Modified , Gene Editing/legislation & jurisprudence , Research/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/economics , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/methods , Food, Genetically Modified/economics , Food, Genetically Modified/standards , Gene Editing/standards , Gene Editing/trends , Humans , Mutagenesis , Plant Breeding/economics , Plant Breeding/legislation & jurisprudence , Plant Breeding/methods , Research/trendsSubject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents , Drug Resistance, Microbial , Drug Utilization/legislation & jurisprudence , Government Regulation , Health Policy/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/legislation & jurisprudence , Agriculture/methods , Animals , Drug Utilization/trends , Health Policy/trends , Humans , Prescription Drug Overuse/legislation & jurisprudence , Prescription Drug Overuse/prevention & control , United KingdomABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The United States of America (USA), European Union (EU), Brazil and China are four of the largest agricultural producers and users of agricultural pesticides in the world. Comparing the inclination and ability of different regulatory agencies to ban or eliminate pesticides that have the most potential for harm to humans and the environment can provide a glimpse into the effectiveness of each nation's pesticide regulatory laws and oversight. METHODS: The approval status of more than 500 agricultural pesticides was identified in the USA, EU, Brazil and China and compared between nations. The amount of pesticides that were used in the USA and banned in these other nations was compiled and linear regression was used to identify trends in use. RESULTS: There are 72, 17, and 11 pesticides approved for outdoor agricultural applications in the USA that are banned or in the process of complete phase out in the EU, Brazil, and China, respectively. Of the pesticides used in USA agriculture in 2016, 322 million pounds were of pesticides banned in the EU, 26 million pounds were of pesticides banned in Brazil and 40 million pounds were of pesticides banned in China. Pesticides banned in the EU account for more than a quarter of all agricultural pesticide use in the USA. The majority of pesticides banned in at least two of these three nations have not appreciably decreased in the USA over the last 25 years and almost all have stayed constant or increased over the last 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Many pesticides still widely used in the USA, at the level of tens to hundreds of millions of pounds annually, have been banned or are being phased out in the EU, China and Brazil. Of the pesticides banned in at least two of these nations, many have been implicated in acute pesticide poisonings in the USA and some are further restricted by individual states. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has all but abandoned its use of non-voluntary cancellations in recent years, making pesticide cancellation in the USA largely an exercise that requires consent by the regulated industry.