Analysen zur Glyphosatanwendung im Ackerbau – Ertragseffekte, Anwendungsmuster und Bestimmungsfaktoren
Analysis of agriculture uses of glyphosate: Yield effects, use patterns, and determinants
by Armin Wiese
Date of Examination:2018-05-17
Date of issue:2019-01-24
Advisor:Prof. Dr. Ludwig Theuvsen
Referee:Prof. Dr. Ludwig Theuvsen
Referee:Dr. Horst-Henning Steinmann
Referee:Prof. Dr. Peter Zwerger
Referee:PD Dr. Martin Potthoff
Files in this item
Name:Dissertation_Armin_Wiese.pdf
Size:2.36Mb
Format:PDF
Abstract
English
Glyphosate is the most commonly used active ingredient in pesticides in the world. However, in Germany, as in the rest of the European Union, its use is surrounded by controversy: Should its use continue to be approved? Are single applications necessary? If so, how much should be applied? To answer such questions regarding the future handling of glyphosate herbicides, insight is needed into their use and yield impacts. The purpose of this dissertation was to identify the determinants and detailed patterns of glyphosate use and to review its yield impacts in non-GMO arable farming. Data was gathered and analysed from 2,026 farming operations with or without glyphosate use. The growing season 2013/2014 was set as a reference. The questionnaire addressed 38 constructs regarding farm data, details of glyphosate use and professional and personal attitudes towards glyphosate pesticides. This was supported by a literature review (n=6,841 articles) providing an overview of global glyphosate use and yield impacts. The part of the glyphosate use survey containing questions about individual attitudes towards glyphosate use, the need for its use and alternatives to its use identified wide variance among respondents. Similarly, farms vary greatly regarding the intensity of their glyphosate use. Several methods were used to identify and analyse use patterns: means comparisons, regression analyses, structural equation modelling and a cluster analysis. While some of the farms did not use glyphosate at all, others used it at least once on their entire arable area. Between these extreme groups lies a large spectrum of farm types that differ in several operational aspects. In all, seven clusters were identified. Farms with greater glyphosate use in preharvest, postharvest and presowing applications tend to plough less, employ fewer workers per hectare and/or be larger. These farms can be characterized as “rationalized farms”; while they have the smallest workforce and the lowest tillage levels, they also suffer greater herbicide efficacy losses than any other farm type. These farm types would most likely be impacted more than others by any goals set for the reduction of glyphosate use and be forced to reorganize their farm management practices. Determinants of glyphosate use vary greatly since scopes of application tend to be crop-specific. Thus, every application is integrated differently into the operational management of different farms and has its own specific characteristics. However, it stood out that the intense postharvest application in rapeseed production does not result in a great reduction in tillage; instead, this application produced greater effects on worker efficiency than did others. Moreover, perennial weeds are not considered as cogent a reason to use glyphosate as weed populations that are felt to be resistant to other pesticides. The frequency distributions of farms' crop-specific glyphosate use are U-shaped: A large percentage of farms don’t apply glyphosate, but, at the same time, a large number apply it on their entire cultivated area. Yet, there are also many farms between these extremes that use glyphosate only site or field specific. An analysis of 11,900 peer-reviewed journals and 42 studies on the yield effects of glyphosate use revealed research gaps. In all, we located 6,841 relevant articles. A cluster analysis showed that a large part of the research was related to glyphosate-resistant cropping systems and toxicological topics. Information on glyphosate yield effects in non-GMO cropping systems is also available—albeit rarely. Sixty-seven papers addressed the yield or weed control effects of postharvest, presowing or preharvest treatment, while only 42 addressed yield effects. Of these 42 studies, four had been conducted in Europe. Considering the highly diverse glyphosate application patterns, after examining the results of all 42 articles, we concluded that there is no scientific basis for published economic calculations on glyphosate yield benefits. To cover current cropping systems adequately, future studies need to be adapted to Europe-specific arable farming conditions. Although research on the yield efficacy of glyphosate is still needed, based on findings of this dissertation it is clear that well-substantiated information regarding the use of glyphosate is already available. The empirical analysis in this dissertation shows that there are reasons for the assumption that glyphosate is often used as part of a routine process. The farm-specific patterns we identified clearly indicate the farm-specific adjustment costs that will result should glyphosate be banned.
Keywords: bibliometrics; glyphosate; herbicides; review; statistical survey