Quantifying the social and economic benefits of the biological control of invasive alien plants in natural ecosystems.

Invasive alien plants reduce ecosystem service delivery, resulting in environmental, economic and social costs. Here we review the returns on investment from biological control of alien plants that invade natural ecosystems. Quantifying the economic benefits of biological control requires estimates of the reductions in ecosystem goods and services arising from invasion. It also requires post-release monitoring to assess whether biological control can restore them, and conversion of these estimates to monetary values, which has seldom been done. Past studies, mainly from Australia and South Africa, indicate that biological control delivers positive and substantial returns on investment, with benefit:cost ratios ranging from 8:1 to over 3000:1. Recent studies are rare, but they confirm that successful biological control delivers attractive returns on investment, which increase over time as the value of avoided impacts accumulates.

Integrated weed management (IWM): why are farmers reluctant to adopt non-chemical alternatives to herbicides?

Implementation of integrated weed management (IWM) has been poor, with little evidence of concomitant reductions in herbicide use. Non-chemical methods are often adopted as a means of compensating for reduced herbicide efficacy, due to increasing resistance, rather than as alternatives to herbicides. Reluctance to adopt non-chemical methods is not due to a lack of research or technology but to a lack of farmer motivation and action. Justifiably, herbicides are often seen as the easier option - their convenience outweighs the increased complexity, costs and management time associated with non-chemical alternatives. Greater use of non-chemical alternatives to herbicides will only occur if the following seven aspects are addressed: (i) better recognition of the reasons why farmers are reluctant to use non-chemical alternatives; (ii) encouraging farmers to adopt a longer-term approach to weed control; (iii) changing farmers' attitudes to pesticides; (iv) paying more attention to the individual farmer's perspective; (v). greater involvement of economists, social scientists and marketing professionals; (vi) re-evaluating research and extension priorities; and (vii) changing the mindset of funders of research and extension. If 'persuasion' fails to deliver greater implementation of IWM, authorities may resort to greater use of financial and other incentives combined with tougher regulations. © 2018 Society of Chemical Industry.

The economic and environmental cost of delayed GM crop adoption: The case of Australia's GM canola moratorium.

Incorporating socio-economic considerations (SECs) into national biosafety regulations regarding genetically modified (GM) crops have opportunity costs. Australia approved the cultivation of GM canola through a science-based risk assessment in 2003, but allowed state moratoria to be instituted based on potential trade impacts over the period 2004 to 2008 and 2010 in the main canola growing states. This analysis constructs a counterfactual assessment using Canadian GM canola adoption data to create an S-Curve of adoption in Australia to measure the environmental and economic opportunity costs of Australia's SEC-based moratoria between 2004 and 2014. The environmental impacts are measured through the amount of chemical active ingredients applied during pest management, the Environmental Impact Quotient indicator, and greenhouse gas emissions. The economic impacts are measured through the variable costs of the weed control programs, yield and the contribution margin. The environmental opportunity costs from delaying the adoption of GM canola in Australia include an additional 6.5 million kilograms of active ingredients applied to canola land; a 14.3% increase in environmental impact to farmers, consumers and the ecology; 8.7 million litres of diesel fuel burned; and an additional 24.2 million kilograms of greenhouse gas (GHG) and compound emissions released. The economic opportunity costs of the SEC-based moratoria resulted in foregone output of 1.1 million metric tonnes of canola and a net economic loss to canola farmers' of AU$485.6 million. The paper provides some of the first quantified, post-adoption evidence on the opportunity cost and environmental impacts of incorporating SECs into GM crop regulation.

What do farmers' weed control decisions imply about glyphosate resistance? Evidence from surveys of US corn fields.

BACKGROUND: The first case of glyphosate-resistant weeds in the United States was documented in 1998, 2 years after the commercialization of genetically engineered herbicide-resistant (HR) corn and soybeans. Currently, over 15 glyphosate-resistant weed species affect US crop production areas. These weeds have the potential to reduce yields, increase costs, and lower farm profitability. The objective of our study is to develop a behavioral model of farmers' weed management decisions and use it to analyze weed resistance to glyphosate in US corn farms. RESULTS: On average, we find that weed control increased US corn yields by 3700 kg ha-1 (worth approximately $US 255 ha-1 ) in 2005 and 3500 kg ha-1 (worth approximately $US 575 ha-1 ) in 2010. If glyphosate resistant weeds were absent, glyphosate killed approximately 99% of weeds, on average, when applied at the label rate in HR production systems. Average control was dramatically lower in states where glyphosate resistance was widespread. CONCLUSION: We find that glyphosate resistance had a significant impact on weed control costs and corn yields of US farmers in 2005 and 2010. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Are herbicides a once in a century method of weed control?

The efficacy of any pesticide is an exhaustible resource that can be depleted over time. For decades, the dominant paradigm - that weed mobility is low relative to insect pests and pathogens, that there is an ample stream of new weed control technologies in the commercial pipeline, and that technology suppliers have sufficient economic incentives and market power to delay resistance - supported a laissez faire approach to herbicide resistance management. Earlier market data bolstered the belief that private incentives and voluntary actions were sufficient to manage resistance. Yet, there has been a steady growth in resistant weeds, while no new commercial herbicide modes of action (MOAs) have been discovered in 30 years. Industry has introduced new herbicide tolerant crops to increase the applicability of older MOAs. Yet, many weed species are already resistant to these compounds. Recent trends suggest a paradigm shift whereby herbicide resistance may impose greater costs to farmers, the environment, and taxpayers than earlier believed. In developed countries, herbicides have been the dominant method of weed control for half a century. Over the next half-century, will widespread resistance to multiple MOAs render herbicides obsolete for many major cropping systems? We suggest it would be prudent to consider the implications of such a low-probability, but high-cost development. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry.

Positive and normative modeling for Palmer amaranth control and herbicide resistance management.

BACKGROUND: Dynamic optimization models are normative; they solve for what growers 'ought to do' to maximize some objective, such as long-run profits. While valuable for research, such models are difficult to solve computationally, limiting their applicability to grower resistance management education. While discussing properties of normative models in general, this study presents results of a specific positive model of herbicide resistance management, applied to Palmer amaranth control on a representative cotton farm. This positive model compares a proactive resistance management strategy to a reactive strategy with lower short-run costs, but greater risk of herbicide resistance developing. RESULTS: The proactive strategy can pay for itself within 1-4 years, with a yield advantage of 4% or less if the yield advantage begins within 1-2 years of adoption. Whether the proactive strategy is preferable is sensitive to resistance onset and yield losses, but less sensitive to cotton prices or baseline yields. Industry rebates to encourage residual herbicide use (to delay resistance to post-emergence treatments) may be too small to alter grower behavior or they may be paid to growers who would have used residuals anyway. Rebates change grower behavior over a relatively narrow range of model parameters. The size of rebates needed to induce a grower to adopt the proactive strategy declines significantly if growers extend their planning horizon from 1 year to 3-4 years. CONCLUSIONS: Whether proactive resistance management is more profitable than a reactive strategy is more sensitive to biological parameters than economic ones. Simulation results suggest growers with longer time horizons (perhaps younger ones) would be more responsive to rebate programs. More empirical work is needed to determine how much rebates increase residual use above what would occur without them. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry.

Climate Change, Carbon Dioxide, and Pest Biology: Monitor, Mitigate, Manage.

Rising concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide ([CO2]) and subsequent changes in climate, including temperature and precipitation extremes, are very likely to alter pest pressures in both managed and unmanaged plant communities. Such changes in pest pressures can be positive (migration from a region) or negative (new introductions), but are likely to be accompanied by significant economic and environmental consequences. Recent studies indicate the range of invasive weeds such as kudzu and insects such as mountain pine beetle have already expanded to more northern regions as temperatures have risen. To reduce these consequences, a better understanding of the link between CO2/climate and pest biology is needed in the context of existing and new strategies for pest management. This paper provides an overview of the probable biological links and the vulnerabilities of existing pest management (especially chemical control) and provides a preliminary synthesis of research needs that could potentially improve the ability to monitor, mitigate, and manage pest impacts.

Weed Dynamics during Transition to Conservation Agriculture in Western Kenya Maize Production.

Weed competition is a significant problem in maize (Zea mays, L.) production in Sub-Saharan Africa. Better understanding of weed management and costs in maize intercropped with beans (Phaseolus vulgaris, L.) during transition to conservation agricultural systems is needed. Changes in weed population and maize growth were assessed for a period of three years at Bungoma where crops are grown twice per year and at Trans-Nzoia where crops are grown once per year. Treatments included three tillage practices: minimum (MT), no-till (NT) and conventional (CT) applied to three cropping systems: continuous maize/bean intercropping (TYPICAL), maize/bean intercropping with relayed mucuna after bean harvest (RELAY) and maize, bean and mucuna planted in a strip intercropping arrangement (STRIP). Herbicides were used in NT, shallow hand hoeing and herbicides were used in MT and deep hoeing with no herbicides were used in CT. Weed and maize performance in the maize phase of each cropping system were assessed at both locations and costs of weed control were estimated at Manor House only. Weed density of grass and forb species declined significantly under MT and NT at Manor House and of grass species only at Mabanga. The greatest declines of more than 50% were observed as early as within one year of the transition to MT and NT in STRIP and TYPICAL cropping systems at Manor House. Transitioning to conservation based systems resulted in a decline of four out of five most dominant weed species. At the same time, no negative impact of MT or NT on maize growth was observed. Corresponding costs of weed management were reduced by $148.40 ha(-1) in MT and $149.60 ha(-1) in NT compared with CT. In conclusion, farmers can benefit from effective and less expensive weed management alternatives early in the process of transitioning to reduced tillage operations.

A long-term experimental case study of the ecological effectiveness and cost effectiveness of invasive plant management in achieving conservation goals: bitou bush control in booderee national park in eastern australia.

Invasive plant management is often justified in terms of conservation goals, yet progress is rarely assessed against these broader goals, instead focussing on short-term reductions of the invader as a measure of success. Key questions commonly remain unanswered including whether invader removal reverses invader impacts and whether management itself has negative ecosystem impacts. We addressed these knowledge gaps using a seven year experimental investigation of Bitou Bush, Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotundata. Our case study took advantage of the realities of applied management interventions for Bitou Bush to assess whether it is a driver or passenger of environmental change, and quantified conservation benefits relative to management costs of different treatment regimes. Among treatments examined, spraying with herbicide followed by burning and subsequent re-spraying (spray-fire-spray) proved the most effective for reducing the number of individuals and cover of Bitou Bush. Other treatment regimes (e.g. fire followed by spraying, or two fires in succession) were less effective or even exacerbated Bitou Bush invasion. The spray-fire-spray regime did not increase susceptibility of treated areas to re-invasion by Bitou Bush or other exotic species. This regime significantly reduced plant species richness and cover, but these effects were short-lived. The spray-fire-spray regime was the most cost-effective approach to controlling a highly invasive species and facilitating restoration of native plant species richness to levels characteristic of uninvaded sites. We provide a decision tree to guide management, where recommended actions depend on the outcome of post-treatment monitoring and performance against objectives. Critical to success is avoiding partial treatments and treatment sequences that may exacerbate invasive species impacts. We also show the value of taking advantage of unplanned events, such as wildfires, to achieve management objectives at reduced cost.

Perspectives on transgenic, herbicide-resistant crops in the United States almost 20 years after introduction.

Herbicide-resistant crops have had a profound impact on weed management. Most of the impact has been by glyphosate-resistant maize, cotton, soybean and canola. Significant economic savings, yield increases and more efficacious and simplified weed management have resulted in widespread adoption of the technology. Initially, glyphosate-resistant crops enabled significantly reduced tillage and reduced the environmental impact of weed management. Continuous use of glyphosate with glyphosate-resistant crops over broad areas facilitated the evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds, which have resulted in increases in the use of tillage and other herbicides with glyphosate, reducing some of the initial environmental benefits of glyphosate-resistant crops. Transgenic crops with resistance to auxinic herbicides, as well as to herbicides that inhibit acetolactate synthase, acetyl-CoA carboxylase and hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase, stacked with glyphosate and/or glufosinate resistance, will become available in the next few years. These technologies will provide additional weed management options for farmers, but will not have all of the positive effects (reduced cost, simplified weed management, lowered environmental impact and reduced tillage) that glyphosate-resistant crops had initially. In the more distant future, other herbicide-resistant crops (including non-transgenic ones), herbicides with new modes of action and technologies that are currently in their infancy (e.g. bioherbicides, sprayable herbicidal RNAi and/or robotic weeding) may affect the role of transgenic, herbicide-resistant crops in weed management. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

New pasture plants intensify invasive species risk.

Agricultural intensification is critical to meet global food demand, but intensification threatens native species and degrades ecosystems. Sustainable intensification (SI) is heralded as a new approach for enabling growth in agriculture while minimizing environmental impacts. However, the SI literature has overlooked a major environmental risk. Using data from eight countries on six continents, we show that few governments regulate conventionally bred pasture taxa to limit threats to natural areas, even though most agribusinesses promote taxa with substantial weed risk. New pasture taxa (including species, subspecies, varieties, cultivars, and plant-endophyte combinations) are bred with characteristics typical of invasive species and environmental weeds. By introducing novel genetic and endophyte variation, pasture taxa are imbued with additional capacity for invasion and environmental impact. New strategies to prevent future problems are urgently needed. We highlight opportunities for researchers, agribusiness, and consumers to reduce environmental risks associated with new pasture taxa. We also emphasize four main approaches that governments could consider as they build new policies to limit weed risks, including (i) national lists of taxa that are prohibited based on environmental risk; (ii) a weed risk assessment for all new taxa; (iii) a program to rapidly detect and control new taxa that invade natural areas; and (iv) the polluter-pays principle, so that if a taxon becomes an environmental weed, industry pays for its management. There is mounting pressure to increase livestock production. With foresight and planning, growth in agriculture can be achieved sustainably provided that the scope of SI expands to encompass environmental weed risks.

Would banning atrazine benefit farmers?

Atrazine, an herbicide used on most of the US corn (maize) crop, is the subject of ongoing controversy, with increasing documentation of its potentially harmful health and environmental impacts. Supporters of atrazine often claim that it is of great value to farmers; most recently, Syngenta, the producer of atrazine, sponsored an "Atrazine Benefits Team" (ABT) of researchers who released a set of five papers in 2011, reporting huge economic benefits from atrazine use in US agriculture. A critical review of the ABT papers shows that they have underestimated the growing problem of atrazine-resistant weeds, offered only a partial review of the effectiveness of alternative herbicides, and ignored the promising option of nonchemical weed management techniques. In addition, the most complete economic analysis in the ABT papers implies that withdrawal of atrazine would lead to a decrease in corn yields of 4.4% and an increase in corn prices of 8.0%. The result would be an increase in corn growers' revenues, equal to US$1.7 billion annually under ABT assumptions. Price impacts on consumers would be minimal: at current levels of ethanol production and use, gasoline prices would rise by no more than US$0.03 per gallon; beef prices would rise by an estimated US$0.01 for a 4-ounce hamburger and US$0.05 for an 8-ounce steak. Thus withdrawal of atrazine would boost farm revenues, while only changing consumer prices by pennies.

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant crop systems in the United States. Economics of herbicide resistance management practices in a 5 year field-scale study.

BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of glyphosate-resistant (GR) crops, growers have often relied on glyphosate-only weed control programs. As a result, multiple weeds have evolved resistance to glyphosate. A 5 year study including 156 growers from Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Nebraska, North Carolina and Mississippi in the United States was conducted to compare crop yields and net returns between grower standard weed management programs (SPs) and programs containing best management practices (BMPs) recommended by university weed scientists. The BMPs were designed to prevent or mitigate/manage evolved herbicide resistance. RESULTS: Weed management costs were greater for the BMP approach in most situations, but crop yields often increased sufficiently for net returns similar to those of the less expensive SPs. This response was similar across all years, geographical regions, states, crops and tillage systems. CONCLUSIONS: Herbicide use strategies that include a diversity of herbicide mechanisms of action will increase the long-term sustainability of glyphosate-based weed management strategies. Growers can adopt herbicide resistance BMPs with confidence that net returns will not be negatively affected in the short term and contribute to resistance management in the long term.

Estimating economic thresholds for site-specific weed control using manual weed counts and sensor technology: an example based on three winter wheat trials.

BACKGROUND: Precision experimental design uses the natural heterogeneity of agricultural fields and combines sensor technology with linear mixed models to estimate the effect of weeds, soil properties and herbicide on yield. These estimates can be used to derive economic thresholds. Three field trials are presented using the precision experimental design in winter wheat. Weed densities were determined by manual sampling and bi-spectral cameras, yield and soil properties were mapped. RESULTS: Galium aparine, other broad-leaved weeds and Alopecurus myosuroides reduced yield by 17.5, 1.2 and 12.4 kg ha(-1) plant(-1) m(2) in one trial. The determined thresholds for site-specific weed control with independently applied herbicides were 4, 48 and 12 plants m(-2), respectively. Spring drought reduced yield effects of weeds considerably in one trial, since water became yield limiting. A negative herbicide effect on the crop was negligible, except in one trial, in which the herbicide mixture tended to reduce yield by 0.6 t ha(-1). Bi-spectral cameras for weed counting were of limited use and still need improvement. Nevertheless, large weed patches were correctly identified. CONCLUSION: The current paper presents a new approach to conducting field trials and deriving decision rules for weed control in farmers' fields.

Mechanism and capacities of reducing ecological cost through rice-duck cultivation.

BACKGROUND: Rice-duck cultivation is the essence of Chinese traditional agriculture. A scientific assessment of the mechanism and its capacity is of theoretical significance and practical value in improving modern agricultural technology. RESULTS: The duck's secretions, excreta and their treading, pecking and predation decrease the occurrence of plant diseases, pests and weeds, enrich species diversity and improve the field environment. The rice-duck intergrowth system effectively prevents rice planthoppers and rice leafhoppers. The control effects can be up to 98.47% and 100% respectively; it also has effects on the control of Chilo suppressalis, Tryporyza incertulas and the rice leafrollers. Notable control results are found on sheath blight, while the effects on other diseases are about 50%. Harm from weeds is placed under primary control; prevention of weeds is sequenced by broadleaf weeds > sedge weeds > Gramineae weeds. Contents of soil organic matter, N, P and K are improved by the system; nutrient utilization is accelerated, resulting in decreased fertilizer application. Greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by 1-2% and duck fodder is saved in this system. There is also an obvious economic benefit. CONCLUSION: Compared to conventional rice cultivation, rice-duck cultivation shows great benefits to ecologic cost and economic income.

Composite hollow fiber nanofiltration membranes for recovery of glyphosate from saline wastewater.

A high performance versatile composite hollow fiber nanofiltration (NF) membrane is reported for the separation of glyphosate from saline waste streams. Preparation of SPEEK based on an amorphous poly (ether ether ketone, PEEK) was investigated. The membrane was prepared by coating sulfonated polyether ether ketone (SPEEK) onto a polyethersulfone (PES) ultrafiltration (UF) hollow fiber membrane. The composite membrane was characterized by water permeability, scanning electron microscopy, and rejection toward sodium sulfate (Na2SO4), sodium chloride (NaCl), and calcium chloride (CaCl2). About 90% rejection toward sulfate anions and only 10% rejection for calcium cations were obtained. A water permeability around 10-13 LMHBar and 90% rejection for polyethylene glycol (PEG) with a molecular weight of 4000-6000 Da were observed. In the separation of glyphosate from saline wastewater, the membrane rejected less than 20% of NaCl and higher than 90% of glyphosate at an operating pressure of 5 bars and pH = 11.0. An economic analysis indicated that the cost for recovery of glyphosate was comparably low to the value gained by an increase in the productivity. The results may lead to a new promising low energy solution for the environmental problem faced by the herbicide industry.

Environmental and economic analysis of application of water hyacinth for eutrophic water treatment coupled with biogas production.

The proliferation of water hyacinth is currently controlled by removing it from a water body and disposing it by landfill in China. Using water hyacinth to remove nutrients from water bodies and to produce biogas is another technically feasible option for the control of water hyacinth, but its environmental and economic performances are not well understood. This study collected data from an experimental biogas plant to develop a lifecycle analysis and a cost benefit analysis for the control of water hyacinth proliferation in a eutrophic lake in China. Comparison was made between the alternative option of using water hyacinth for biogas production and the current practice of disposing it in landfills. The results reveal that the biogas option is economically feasible with a positive energy balance. The removal of water hyacinth to produce biogas can contribute to water quality improvement and GHG emission reduction whose values, however, depend on the processing scale of the biogas plant. Since both the current approach and the biogas option can remove nutrients from water bodies, the additional value of water quality improvement resulting from the biogas option is only possible when the processing scale of the biogas plant is greater than the amount of water hyacinth disposed by landfill. The emission of methane deserves attention when water hyacinth is disposed by landfill. The biogas option can respond to China's policies on water pollution control, renewable energy development, and energy saving and emission reduction.

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 6: Timeliness of economic decision-making in implementing weed resistance management strategies.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of glyphosate-resistant (GR) crops in the late 1990s made weed control in maize, cotton and soybean simple. With the rapid adoption of GR crops, many growers began to rely solely on glyphosate for weed control. This eventually led to the evolution of GR weeds. Growers are often reluctant to adopt a weed resistance best management practice (BMP) because of the added cost of additional herbicides to weed control programs which would reduce short-term revenue. This study was designed to evaluate when a grower that is risk neutral (profit maximizing) or risk averse should adopt a weed resistance BMP. RESULTS: Whether a grower is risk neutral or risk averse, the optimal decision would be to adopt a weed resistance BMP when the expected loss in revenue is greater than 30% and the probability of resistance evolution is 0.1 or greater. However, if the probability of developing resistance increases to 0.3, then the best decision would be to adopt a weed resistance BMP when the expected loss is 10% or greater. CONCLUSION: Given the scenarios analyzed, risk-neutral or risk-averse growers should implement a weed resistance BMP with confidence that they have made the right decision economically and avoided the risk of lost revenue from resistance. If the grower wants to continue to see the same level of return, adoption of BMP is required.

Herbicide-resistant weed management: focus on glyphosate.

This review focuses on proactive and reactive management of glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds. Glyphosate resistance in weeds has evolved under recurrent glyphosate usage, with little or no diversity in weed management practices. The main herbicide strategy for proactively or reactively managing GR weeds is to supplement glyphosate with herbicides of alternative modes of action and with soil-residual activity. These herbicides can be applied in sequences or mixtures. Proactive or reactive GR weed management can be aided by crop cultivars with alternative single or stacked herbicide-resistance traits, which will become increasingly available to growers in the future. Many growers with GR weeds continue to use glyphosate because of its economical broad-spectrum weed control. Government farm policies, pesticide regulatory policies and industry actions should encourage growers to adopt a more proactive approach to GR weed management by providing the best information and training on management practices, information on the benefits of proactive management and voluntary incentives, as appropriate. Results from recent surveys in the United States indicate that such a change in grower attitudes may be occurring because of enhanced awareness of the benefits of proactive management and the relative cost of the reactive management of GR weeds.

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 5: Effects of glyphosate-based weed management programs on farm-level profitability.

BACKGROUND: Glyphosate-resistant (GR) crops have changed the way growers manage weeds and implement control strategies. Since the introduction of GR crops, growers in many instances have relied on glyphosate almost exclusively to control a broad spectrum of weeds. This over-reliance on glyphosate has resulted in the evolution of glyphosate resistance in some weed species. Growers and scientists are concerned about the sustainability of GR crops and glyphosate. When a grower is making decisions about weed control strategies, economic costs and benefits of the program are primary criteria for selection and implementation. Studies across six states were initiated in 2006 to compare the economics of using a weed resistance best management practice (BMP) system with a grower's standard production system. RESULTS: Resistance BMP systems recommended by university scientists were more costly but provided similar yields and economic returns. Rotation of GR crops resulted in a higher net return (maize and soybean) compared with continuous GR crop (cotton or soybean) or rotating a GR crop with a non-GR crop (maize). CONCLUSION: Growers can implement weed resistance BMP systems with the confidence that their net returns will be equivalent in the short run, and, in the long term, resistance BMP systems will prevent or delay the evolution of GR weeds in their fields, resulting in substantial savings.