Step 1: Assess proposed or registered uses of the pesticide for which alternative(s) need to be sought
Purpose
This step aims at identifying the prevalent uses of the highly hazardous pesticide (HHP) (i.e. crop–pest combinations) as well as its users.
Information required and possible sources:
Information | Possible sources |
---|---|
Proposed or registered pesticide uses: all crop–pest combinations for which the HHP is intended to be used or has been authorized |
|
Volume of the pesticide imported |
|
Volume of the pesticide locally manufactured or formulated (where relevant) |
|
Actual uses in the field, e.g. by district/area or by crop/use |
|
Procedure:
- Map all actual and/or authorised uses of the HHP (for all relevant formulated products);
- Estimate quantities of the pesticide used annually, during the last 3 to 5 years (based on importation and/or manufacturing and/or use statistics);
- Identify registered uses which are not actually used;
- Analyse the geographical distribution of use of the HHP within the country, to identify key user groups and stakeholders
- Gather information on the ways in which the pesticide is being used in the field, from farmers’ interviews, producers’ associations, researchers, extension officers and pesticide dealers/distributors.
Example summary of an analysis of the uses of the insecticide HHP-X in a hypothetical country
Active ingredient: HHP-X Registered formulated products: A = 100 g a.i./L EC B = 220 g a.i./kg WG | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Possible conclusions:
| ||||||
Crop | Pest | Product | Registered use | Geographical distribution of use | Estimated yearly pesticide use | Main users |
Maize | Fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) | A | Yes | Countrywide | 70 – 90 tons | Large-scale cereal farmers |
Tomato | Fruit worm (Helicoverpa zea) | A | No | District E | Use regularly observed, but quantity unknown | Urban and peri-urban vegetable farms |
Cotton | American Bollworm (Helicoverpa armigera) | B | Yes | District A District B District C | 1,000 – 1,500 tons | Small-holder cotton farmers |
Cucurbits | Cucumber moth (Diaphania indica) | B | Yes | Currently not used in this crop (extension service information) |
Example summary of an analysis of the uses of the fungicide HHP-Z in a hypothetical country
Active ingredient: HHP-Z Registered formulated products: C = 450 g a.i./L SC | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Possible conclusions: Even though HHP-Z (product C) is registered, it has not recently been imported nor locally formulated, and is therefore unlikely to be used. The registration authority may assess whether the registration of HHP-Z can be cancelled. | ||||||
Crop | Disease | Product | Registered use | Geographical distribution of use | Estimated yearly pesticide use | Main users |
Sugar cane | Eye spot (Helminthosporium sacchari) | C | Yes | HHP-Z (product A) has not been imported during the last 3 years; only a minor quantity (350 L) was imported 4 years ago. HHP-Z (product A) is not locally formulated either. | ||
Pineapple | White leaf spot (Ceratocystis paradoxa) | C | Yes |
Outcome of Step 1:
- Current uses of the HHP (crop–pest combinations) for which alternatives may be required;
- Key stakeholders to engage in the process.
Navigation
Next: Step 2. Evaluate crops/pests for which alternative(s) need to be sought