Mandatory integrated pest management in the European Union: experimental insights on consumers’ reactions
- 84 Downloads
A realistic experiment with 189 French consumers was conducted to analyse consumers’ reaction to the transition towards integrated pest management (IPM) as the standard in European farming. Results indicate high substitutability between IPM and organic tomatoes. It suggests that IPM sales will benefit from the withdrawal of conventional products from the market only if there is a significant reduction in the price of IPM products as compared to organic ones and/or an important increase in the shelf space dedicated to IPM products. While information on IPM guidelines increases IPM products purchases, providing extra information on residue levels in IPM tomatoes has no further impact on consumers’ choices in this experiment.
KeywordsIntegrated pest management Organic Tomatoes Sustainable use of pesticides directive Multinomial probit Open-ended choice experiment
JEL classificationC91 D12 Q13 Q18
The survey on which this paper is based was funded by the IPTS, JRC-European Commission in the context of the project “Consumers’ willingness to pay for Integrated Production: experimental design and data collection”, PO 153580. However, the views expressed are purely those of the authors and may not, in any circumstances, be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. Marianne Lefebvre acknowledges funding from Agropolis Fondation and the French National Research Agency (program “Investissements d’avenir” ANR-10-LABX-0001-01, Project “CAP-eye”). The authors would like to thank the partners of the FP7-PURE project for supporting the initial idea. We would especially like to thank Christine Poncet (INRA) for contributing to the elaboration of the information on the different types of tomatoes disclosed to participants. We are also grateful to the two anonymous referees for their constructive input.
M. Lefebvre, S.R.H. Langrell and S. Gomez-y-Paloma formulated the original question. The experiment was designed by E. Ginon, S. Marette and A. Sutan with the help of M. Lefebvre and G. Mateu and programmed by G. Mateu in z-Tree. The sessions were organized by C. Biguzzi with the help of E. Ginon, G. Mateu, A. Sutan and H. Saysithideth. M. Lefebvre performed data analysis and wrote the first version of the manuscript. All authors provided feedback on previous versions of the manuscript. M. Lefebvre was responsible for overall coordination.
- Aubertot, J.N., J.M. Barbier, A. Carpentier, J.J. Gril, L. Guichard, P. Lucas, S. Savary, I. Savini, and M. Voltz. (2005). Pesticides, agriculture et environnement: réduire l’utilisation des pesticides et en limiter les impacts environnementaux. Rapport d’expertise réalisé par l’INRA et le Cemagref à la demande du Ministère de l’agriculture et de la pêche (MAP) et du Ministère de l’écologie et du développement durable (MEDD)Google Scholar
- Baker, B. P., Benbrook, C. M., Groth, E., III, Lutz Benbrook, K. (2002). Pesticide residues in conventional, integrated pest management (IPM)-grown and organic foods: insights from three US data sets. Food Additives and Contaminants, 19(5), 427–446.Google Scholar
- Canali, G. (2011). The role of the ‘integrated production’ scheme in the fruit and vegetable CMO. In A. Sorrentino, R. Henke, & S. Severini (Eds.), The common agricultural policy after the Fischler reform (pp. 417–430). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- Chatfield, M., & Mander, A. (2009). The Skillings–Mack test (Friedman test when there are missing data). The Stata Journal, 9(2), 299–305.Google Scholar
- EU. (2009). Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides.Google Scholar
- Ginon, E., Ares, G., Esteves dos Santos Laboissière, L. H., Brouard, J., Issanchou, S., & Deliza, R. (2014a). Logos indicating environmental sustainability in wine production: an exploratory study on how do Burgundy wine consumers perceive them. Food Research International, 62, 837–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Grolleau, G., Sutan, A., & Vranceanu, R. (2013). Taking the well-being of future generations seriously: do people contribute more to intra-temporal or inter-temporal public goods? ESSEC working paper. Document de Recherche ESSEC / Centre de recherche de l’ESSEC. ISSN: 1291–9616. WP 1313.Google Scholar
- Lamine, C., Haynes, I., Barzman, M., & Paratte, R. (2010). The potential role of supermarket procurement strategies as drivers of IPM - Policy Brief No. 2. ENDURE Policy Brief No., 2, p. 6.Google Scholar
- Mc Fadden, D. L. (1973). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105–142). Academic: New York.Google Scholar
- Mouron, P., Heijne, B., Naef, A., Strassemeyer, J., Hayer, F., Avilla, J., Alaphilippe, A., Höhn, H., Hernandez, J., Mack, G., Gaillard, G., Solé, J., Sauphanor, B., Patocchi, A., Samietz, J., Bravin, E., Lavigne, C., Bohanec, M., Golla, B., Scheer, C., Aubert, U., & Bigler, F. (2012). Sustainability assessment of crop protection systems: SustainOS methodology and its application for apple orchards. Agricultural Systems, 113(0), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pelzer, E., Fortino, G., Bockstaller, C., Angevin, F., Lamine, C., Moonen, C., Vasileiadis, V., Guérin, D., Guichard, L., Reau, R., & Messéan, A. (2012). Assessing innovative cropping systems with DEXiPM, a qualitative multi-criteria assessment tool derived from DEXi. Ecological Indicators, 18(0), 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Train, K. E. (2009). Discrete choice methods with simulation (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- van der Velden, N., R. Suay, A. Urbaneja, M. Giorgini, M. Ruoco, C. Poncet, and A. Lefèvre. (2012). Recent developments and market opportunities for IPM in greenhouse tomatoes in southern Europe: consequences for advanced IPM toolboxes and greenhouse engineering. Research report LEI memorandum 12–077, Wageningen; URGoogle Scholar
- Vasileiadis, V. P., Sattin, M., Otto, S., Veres, A., Pálinkás, Z., Ban, R., Pons, X., Kudsk, P., van der Weide, R., Czembor, E., Moonen, A. C., & Kiss, J. (2011). Crop protection in European maize-based cropping systems: current practices and recommendations for innovative integrated pest management. Agricultural Systems, 104(7), 533–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wibberley, J. (1995). Cropping intensity and farming systems: integrity and intensity in international perspective. Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England, 156, 43–55.Google Scholar