Continuing Issues in the Limitations of Pesticide Use in Developing Countries

The rationale for pesticide use in agriculture is that costs associated with pesticide pollution are to be justified by its benefits, but this is not so obvious. Valuing the benefits by simple economic analysis has increased pesticide use in agriculture and consequently produced pesticide-induced “public ills.” This paper attempts to explore the research gaps of the economic and social consequences of pesticide use in developing countries, particularly with an example of Nepal. We argue that although the negative sides of agricultural development, for example- soil, water, and air pollution; pest resistance and resurgence; bioaccumulation, bio-magnification; and loss of biodiversity and ecosystem resilience caused by the use of pesticides in agriculture, are “developmental problems” and are “unintentional,” the magnitude may be increased by undervaluing the problems in the analysis of its economic returns. Despite continuous effort for holistic system analyses for studying complex phenomena like pesticides impacts, the development within the academic science has proceeded in the opposite direction that might have accelerated marginalization of the third world subsistence agricultural communities. We hypothesize that, if these adversities are realized and accounted for, the benefits from the current use of pesticides could be outweighed by the costs of pollution and ill human health. This paper also illustrates different pathways and mechanisms for marginalization. In view of potential and overall negative impacts of pesticide use, we recommend alternative ways of controlling pests such as community integrated pest management (IPM) along with education and training activities. Such measures are likely to reduce the health and environmental costs of pesticide pollution, and also enhance the capabilities of third world agricultural communities in terms of knowledge, decision making, innovation, and policy change.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10806-010-9243-9
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 40,683
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Values, Technologies, and Epistemology.Zahra Meghani - 2008 - Agriculture and Human Values 25 (1):25-34.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Pesticides and the Patent Bargain.Cristian Timmermann - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (1):1-19.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Herbicide Resistant Sugar Beet – What is the Problem?Kathrine Hauge Madsen & Peter Sandøe - 2001 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):161-168.
Agricultural Practices, Ecology, and Ethics in the Third World.L. S. Westra, K. L. Bowen & B. K. Behe - 1991 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 4 (1):60-77.
Amounts of Pesticides Reaching Target Pests: Environmental Impacts and Ethics. [REVIEW]David Pimentel - 1995 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 8 (1):17-29.
Pesticides, Valuations and Politics.Olle Pettersson - 1992 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (1):103-106.


Added to PP index

Total views
47 ( #166,982 of 2,242,830 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #814,790 of 2,242,830 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature