NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE AARHUS UNIVERSITY PestNaB: Presentation of pesticide risk indicator developed at national level in Denmark Christian

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTEAARHUS UNIVERSITY

PestNaB: Presentation of pesticide risk indicator developed at national level in Denmark

Christian Kjær Peter Borgen Sørensen


PestNaB› It is suitable as a framework for a harmonised

risk indicator because:

› It is flexible with respect to geographical coverage of data and variety of data and model types

› Can suggest most effective risk minimisation practises

› Can support setting up national action plan to reduce pesticide risk

› Visualise areas of concern (organisms at risk and areas of particularly concern)

› Incorporate new knowledge


PestNaB’s focus

From EEA internal working paper, 2003: Environmental Indicators:Typology and Use in Reporting


Aim of a new improved indicator, PestNaB

› Make an indicator that can reflect the potential risk for nature due to application of pesticides

› Excluding› Contamination of groundwater› Risk for human health


Process

› Identify the most important and certain pesticide side effects

› Aggregate incomparable effect types in a reasonable way

› Aggregation method invented that meet the challenges by assessing hot spots of risk (when more potential effects are likely to occur simultaneously)


Basis of the indicator PestNaB

› Where are nature elements occurring?

› Where is the spraying occurring?

› Which pesticides has been sprayed?

› How toxic are these pesticides?


Basic unit for analysisGrids of 1 km2


› Information about fields: Crop type, geographical

position etc.

› Information about nature: Type, position, distance to

fields

› Average used amount for different crops (based on

expert knowledge and sales numbers)

Quadrate information


No

. Exposure

Sub

ordinate

indicator Protection

1 Within the agricultural

fields

Mammals Terrestrial nature within

agricultural fields

2 - Birds -

3 - Bees -

4 - Earthworm

s

-

5 - Insects Food chain within agricultural field

6 - Plants -

7 Drift to terrestrial

nature

Bees Terrestrial nature in the vicinity of

agricultural fields

8 - Arthropod

s

-

9 - Plants -

Sub ordinate Indicators


No. Exposure

Sub ordinate

Indicator Protection

10 Leaching Algae Surface water

11 - Invertebrates -

12 - Fishes -

13 Drift to streams Algae -


15 - Fishes -

16 Drift to ponds Algae -


18 - Fishes -

Sub ordinate Indicators


Sub ordinate indicator calculations

a1 m2

x1,ax2,a

x3,a

x1

1

ocK1

1


Loadn: Toxic load for endpoint nA: Grid area (m2)Dosei,a: Mean yearly dose of active

ingredient i and for squaremeter a in the grid

Toxn,i: Toxicity selected for indicator n and active ingredient i

xe,a: Distance for square meter number a

i: Index for active ingredientsI: Number if active ingredientsa: Index for a specific square meterA: Number of square meters in the grid, - the area = 1000,000 m2

e: Index for type of nature element (Streams/rivers, Ponds/lakes,

Terrestrial)

Indicator calculation in a quadrate

A

a ae

I

i in

ai

n x

Tox

Dose

Load1 ,

1 ,

,

1

For indicators where the transport pathway is spray drift


What do we do› Compare all quadrates i one year with all

quadrates in another year and separate result of comparison into three categories:

› all sub indicators agree on › Year A > Year B› Year A < Year B› Unable to qualify such a statement because one or

more indicators points opposite to the rest








How to rank two scenarios, A and B

BABABA

BABABARS

RSA>BA>B: The Rank Strength for A>B

In other words: We are counting risk level hotspots, where several indicators simultaneously are predicting high load


Scenario A: Application anno 2007

Scenario B: Application anno 2001

: 293,854,077

389,177,853

: 1,056,501,190

: 196.420

RSA>B: -0,05

BA

How to rank two scenarios, A and B


Categories of protection

2001 highest risk

2007 highest riskAll biotopes

Agriculturalarea

Terrestrialbiotopes

Aquaticbiotopes


Separate sub ordinate indicators RS

Spray drift to terrestrial nature, plants 0.29

Spray drift to terrestrial nature, arthropods 0.24

Field area, food chain involving plants 0.22

Field area, earthworms 0.17

Field area, food chains involving insects 0.03

Spray drift to streams, algae -0.07

Spray drift to ponds and lakes, algae -0.07

Field area, birds -0.11

Field area, bees -0.21

Spray drift to terrestrial nature, bees -0.23

Drain water, algae -0.28

Spray drift to streams, fish -0.36

Spray drift to ponds and lakes, fish -0.34

Field area, mammals -0.35

Drain water, fish -0.41

Spray drift to streams, invertebrates -0.51

Spray drift to ponds and lakes, invertebrates -0.51

Drain water, invertebrates -0.51 200

1 h

igher

toxic

pre

ssure

200

7

hig

her


Assess potential for risk reductionPestNaB includes all means of management to

reduce risk:› Change in application rates (ex. convert to organic

farming, use of reduced dosages)› Change in rate of transport to ecosystem (unsprayed

buffer zones etc.)› Change in substance composition (substitution)› Change in location of application including

unsprayed buffer zones in the edge of fields


Testing means of risk reduction

All Indicators

Category of protection

Within agricultural

fields

Terrestrial Outside

agricultural fields

Surfacewater

No reduction compared to 2007

0.18 0.36 0.50 0.13

Non spraying zones (10 m) 0.15 0.36 0.28 0.13

Reduced spraying zones (20 m)

0.13 0.36 0.13 0.13

Substitution -0.02 -0.06 0.06 -0.19

Increased organic farming (from

2% to 4% of agricultural area)

0.17 0.33 0.47 0.12

Reduced usage of insecticides

0.10 0.11 0.21 0.09

All means jointly -0.13 -0.09 -0.21 -0.21


Use in monitoring and science› This type of indicator can aid the design of

monitoring programmes and guide science to plan research activities that search for “real” adverse effects by answering following question:

› “Where do we expect effect are most likely to occur taking into account the uncertainty of the data background”


PestNaB analysis of year 2007.Individual grid rank using indicators forecotoxicity in surface water ecosystems.

Strongest hotspots

Weaker hotspots

No hotspots


ConclusionThe PestNaB indicator can analyse

› Hot spot areas for pesticide risks

› Trends in the pesticide risk on a chosen scale

› Means of risk minimisation

› Fulfilment of objectives for risk minimisation

› Time trend (upward/downward) in the risk pressure

The PestNaB indicator can facilitate

› Flexible application of different type of knowledge

Documents

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE AARHUS UNIVERSITY PestNaB: Presentation of pesticide risk indicator developed at national level in Denmark Christian