Authorization of microbial plant protection products in the Scandinavian countries: A comparative analysis

被引:14
|
作者
Kvakkestad, Valborg [1 ]
Sundbye, Anette [1 ]
Gwynn, Roma [2 ]
Klingen, Ingeborg [1 ]
机构
[1] Norwegian Inst Bioecon Res NIBIO, As, Norway
[2] Rationale, Duns TD11 3QA, Scotland
关键词
Microbial plant protection products; Authorization; Regulation; Scandinavia; BIOLOGICAL-CONTROL; PESTICIDES; BIOPESTICIDES; POLICY; RISK; FUTURE; SAFETY; BIODIVERSITY; AGRICULTURE;
D O I
10.1016/j.envsci.2020.01.017
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The EU has developed a Directive on Sustainable Use of Chemical Pesticides (2009/128/EC) (SUD) that aims to enhance the use of non-chemical alternatives to pesticides like microbial plant protection products (PPP). The number of authorized microbial PPP for plant protection has increased globally during the last decade. There is, however, variation between different countries. Sweden and Denmark have for example each authorized 20 microbial PPP while Norway has only authorized four microbial PPP. Norway has also received significantly fewer applications for authorization of microbial PPP than the other Scandinavian countries. We explore possible explanations for the observed differences. Our results show that that the regulations in the three countries had similar requirements for the authorisation of microbial PPP. The size of the market is somewhat smaller in Norway than in Sweden and Denmark, and could therefore explain some of the differences. We suggest, however, that the most important explanation is implementation differences in terms of different decisions made in the authorization process. By comparing the authorization process for three microbial PPP in the Scandinavian countries, we found that Norway used more time for the product authorization decisions. Norway assess the same types of microbial PPP more restrictively with respect to environmental aspects and especially human health risks.
引用
收藏
页码:115 / 124
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Authorization of Plant Protection Products
    不详
    [J]. SUGAR INDUSTRY INTERNATIONAL, 2024, 149 (05): : 386 - 386
  • [2] The Interlocking between Testing of Plant Protection Equipment and the Authorization of Plant Protection Products
    Rautmann, Dirk
    [J]. CONFERENCE: AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING: LAND-TECHNIK 2010 - PARTNERSCHAFTEN FUR NEUR INNOVATIONSPOTENZIALE, 2010, : 161 - 166
  • [3] Evaluation of ecotoxicological field studies for authorization of plant protection products in Europe
    de Jong, FMW
    Mensink, BJWG
    Smit, CE
    Montforts, MHMM
    [J]. HUMAN AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT, 2005, 11 (06): : 1157 - 1176
  • [4] Current Scientific and Technical Knowledge in the Authorization Process for Plant Protection Products
    Fischer, Kristian
    [J]. JOURNAL FOR EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENTAL & PLANNING LAW, 2005, 2 (02) : 135 - 141
  • [5] Leopoldina Expert Group calls for stricter Authorization Procedures for Plant Protection Products
    不详
    [J]. GESUNDE PFLANZEN, 2018, 70 (03): : 168 - 169
  • [6] The accession countries benefit in the field of plant protection products
    Stanek, A
    [J]. TOXICOLOGY LETTERS, 2004, 149 (1-3) : 429 - 432
  • [7] Comparative cytotoxicity of plant protection products and their active ingredients
    Adler-Flindt, Sarah
    Martin, Sabine
    [J]. TOXICOLOGY IN VITRO, 2019, 54 : 354 - 366
  • [8] Comparative cytotoxicity of plant protection products and their active substances
    Adler-Flindt, S.
    Martin, S.
    [J]. NAUNYN-SCHMIEDEBERGS ARCHIVES OF PHARMACOLOGY, 2018, 391 : S82 - S82
  • [9] STATE AID IN ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION IN SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES
    Bartniczak, Bartosz
    [J]. HRADEC ECONOMIC DAYS 2011, PT II: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF REGIONS, 2011, : 27 - 31
  • [10] Ecotoxicological risk analysis of plant protection products
    Daniel, Otto
    Gandolfi, Michela
    Aldrich, Annette
    Baumann, Heike
    Buechi, Rudolf
    [J]. AGRARFORSCHUNG, 2007, 14 (06): : 266 - 271