S C I E N C E O F T H E T O T A L E N V I R O N M E N T 3 9 0 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 3 4 1 – 3 4 5

ava i l ab l e a t www.sc i enced i rec t . com

www.e l sev i e r. com/ loca te / sc i to tenv

Assessing farmers' practices on disposal of pesticide wasteafter use

Christos A. Damalas⁎, Georgios K. Telidis, Stavros D. ThanosDepartment of Agricultural Development of Pieria, 28th Octovriou 40, 60100 Katerini, Greece

A R T I C L E I N F O

⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +30 2351 351 21E-mail address: damalas@mail.gr (C.A. Dam

0048-9697/$ – see front matter © 2007 Elsevidoi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.10.028

A B S T R A C T

Article history:Received 6 May 2007Received in revised form7 October 2007Accepted 15 October 2007Available online 26 November 2007

Common practices of farmers on disposal of pesticide waste after use were surveyed in fiveregions of the rural area of Pieria in northern Greece using a structured questionnaireadministered via personal interviews. Concerning leftover spray solutions, most farmersreported that they normally re-spray the treated field area until the spraying tank is empty(54.9%) or they apply the leftover spray solutions to another crop listed on the product label(30.2%). Aminority of the farmers (4.3%)mentioned that they often release the leftover spraysolutions near or into irrigation canals and streams. As regards rinsates generated fromwashing the application equipment, most farmers reported that they release the rinsatesover a non-cropped area (45.7%) or they drop the rinsates near or into irrigation canals andstreams (40.7%). Moreover, a great proportion of the farmers stated that they dump theempty containers by the field (30.2%) or they throw them near or into irrigation canals andstreams (33.3%). Burning the empty containers in open fire (17.9%) or throwing the emptycontainers in common waste places (11.1%) was also reported. Several farmers stated thatthey continue to use old pesticides for spraying (35.8%). Training programs which raiseawareness of farmers of the potential hazards of pesticide use and particularly of the propermanagement of waste products, recycling programs and collection systems for unwantedagricultural chemicals to prevent inappropriate waste disposal, as well as improvingpackaging of pesticides to minimize waste production are essential for promoting safetyduring all phases of pesticide handling.

© 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:ContainersOld pesticidesPesticide solutionsRinsatesSafety

1. Introduction

In recent years, concern has been growing that improperdisposal of pesticide wastes can create hazards for humansand the environment (Elfvendahl et al., 2004; Sivanesan et al.,2004; Buczynska and Szadkowska-Stanczyk, 2005). Intensefarming and pest control activities which are often based onheavy pesticide use promote hazardous waste build up inmany phases of pesticide handling. Due to lack of educationand guidance in the propermanagement of small quantities ofpesticide-related waste, hazardous chemicals are often leftlying around in rural and urban areas, whereas the reuse ofcontaminated empty containers for domestic purposes, which

9; fax: +30 2351 351 111.alas).

er B.V. All rights reserved

has been frequently identified in many developing areas, isanother major health risk (Clarke et al., 1997; Sinzogan et al.,2004; Ibitayo, 2006; Lu, 2006).

Pesticide waste is considered any substance or materialcontaining pesticide that cannot or will not be used andtherefore must disposed of. Pesticide waste includes surplusspray solutions, pesticide leftover which remains in theapplication equipment after use, pesticide-contaminatedwater produced by cleaning the application equipment orfrom rinsing the empty pesticide containers, pesticide-con-taminated materials generated from cleaning up spilledpesticides, empty (unrinsed) pesticide containers, and oldpesticide products (Nesheim and Fishel, 2005). Proper

.

342 S C I E N C E O F T H E T O T A L E N V I R O N M E N T 3 9 0 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 3 4 1 – 3 4 5

pesticide waste disposal is an important part of responsiblepesticide use. Accidental release or uncontrolled discharge ofpesticide waste into the environment can harm people andcontaminate the environment. Pesticide-contaminated waterposes a great hazard to non-target organisms such as plants,beneficial insects, fish and other aquatic life.

Generation of pesticide waste of various kinds is ofteninevitable in almost every agricultural operation from storageto use and equipment cleanup (Felsot et al., 2003). Even emptypesticide containers may often retain unacceptable quantitiesof pesticide residues if they are not rinsed properly (Braun et al.,1983; Miles et al., 1983). The best way to manage waste which isderived from pesticide use is to avoid producing it in the firstplace. Ideally, this can be achieved by planning the job properlyand using the amount of the product needed (Whitford et al.,2001). However, improper disposal of unwanted pesticidesolutions and empty pesticide containers have been confirmedasmajor problems inmany situations (Avory and Coggon, 1994;London, 1994; Stewart, 1996; Yassin et al., 2002; Hurtig et al.,2003; Ntow et al., 2006; Recena et al., 2006).

Management of hazardous waste in Greece is regulated bynational legislation (Joint Ministerial Decisions 13588/725/06and 24944/1159/06 setting up terms, measures, and generaltechnical requirements to the management of hazardouswaste) according to the EU legislation (Directive 91/689/EECamended by Directive 94/31/EC and Regulation No166/06)which provide a legal framework for the management anddisposal of toxic waste. However, despite the existence oflegislation, the present methods for disposing of hazardouswaste are not adequate and often there is poor enforcement(Ferguson, 1999). Unfortunately, no information is available onthe management of pesticide waste at the farmer's level.

Knowledge of farmers' attitudes towards disposal ofpesticide waste can be useful to find out critical points ofintervention to promote safety during pesticide handling.Such knowledge lacks in Greece where studies of this kindhave not been conducted. Prompted by local interest in publicand environmental health aspects of pesticides, the Depart-ment of Agricultural Development of Pieria took the initiativeto monitor farmers' practices on disposal of pesticide wasteafter use and to develop a public education and informationprogram on safe use of pesticides. Thus, a survey wasconducted to obtain this information and some of the mostsalient observations are reported herein. Although this studywas concerned with pesticide waste disposal in the area ofPieria, the information gained could be of interest also to othercommunities. In particular, the objective of this study was toassess the most common practices regarding disposal ofpesticide waste after use among farmers of the rural area ofPieria in northern Greece.

2. Materials and methods

The study was conducted in five rural regions of prefecture ofPieria. The prefecture of Pieria is located at the southern partof northern Greece, covers a total area of 1516 km2, and has apopulation of 134,739 habitants. The examined regionsinclude a great proportion of rural population heavily depen-dent on cereal crop production, tobacco production, tree fruit

production, and also dairy operations and theywere randomlyselected to obtain a representative sample for all the area.

One hundred and sixty-two farmers participated voluntar-ily in the study. The surveyed population included localfarmers over 21 years living all year in the regions studied.Selection of farmers was totally random. Initially, prospectiveparticipants were identified by farmers' complete lists kept atthe Directorate of Agricultural Development of Pieria and thenwere contacted by telephone to find out if they were willing toparticipate in the study. To avoid any potential bias, it wasmade clear to the farmers that the study was only foracademic research. In case a farmer refused to participate,the selection procedure was repeated until an adequatesample was obtained. Based on the time frame set and theavailable financial sources for this project, an adequatesample was defined as any sample which would provideerror less than 10% at 95% confidence level.

All participants of the survey were full-time farmersearning off their income mainly from agricultural activities.Most of them were small-scale landowners (owners of about5 ha but no more than 10 ha) with small family farms.However, it must be noted here that the size of a landholdingalone is not always a good criterion for categorizing farmers.Farmers who own 1 ha of irrigated land are generally moreprosperous than those who own 2 ha of land in an area proneto drought with low productivity. Field sizes varied consider-ably from small and spatially dispersed parcels to muchgreater plots due to the great fragmentation of the arable land.

Data were collected by means of a structured questionnaireadministered via personal interviews. This method was usedbecause some of the respondents did not have formal educationand many of those who had some education might not befamiliar with the terminology used in the questionnaire. Thequestionnaire contained both fix-response and open-endedquestions about common practices of farmers on disposal ofpesticide waste after use. In particular, farmers were presentedwith a number of multiple choice tests and were asked tochoose the answer which they thought it best described theirattitude for each particular case. Besides closed questions, freespace for alternative answers was also included in all questions.The questions and the possible alternative answers were readto interviewees by the interviewers who ticked the givenanswer(s). The interviews were conducted in a friendly wayand there was very good cooperation without any refusals.

The raw data from the screening questionnaires were codedand entered into specially designed databases (MicrosoftAccess). Once the data had been initially entered they werecarefully checked for entry errors. Relative frequencies ofanswers were calculated for each question. Data were trans-ferred to appropriate spreadsheets (Microsoft Excel) and SPSS(version 10) for statistical analysis. Relative frequencies werecompared using the chi-square test to determine significantdifferences in the proportions of given answers. Mean differ-ences were declared significant at the 95% confidence level.

3. Results and discussion

Respondents' ageswere between 21 and 70 yearswith an averageof 47.8 and a standard deviation 10.9 years. Agedistributionof the

Table 1 – Age of respondents

Age No. %

21–30 8 4.931–40 32 19.841–50 57 35.251–60 44 27.261–70 21 12.9

Table 3 – Farmers' attitudes on disposing of leftoverpesticide spray solutions

Main attitude No. %

I store the leftover solution for another application 3 1.9I apply the leftover solution over a non-cropped area 14 8.6I re-spray the treated field area until the tank is empty 89 54.9I release the leftover solution to irrigation canals orstreams

7 4.3

I apply the leftover solution to another crop listed on thelabel

49 30.2

Farmers were asked to choose only one statement, which bestdescribed their case.

Table 4 – Farmers' attitudes on disposal of rinsates after

343S C I E N C E O F T H E T O T A L E N V I R O N M E N T 3 9 0 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 3 4 1 – 3 4 5

respondents is shown in Table 1. The largest group of respon-dents was the age group of 41–50 with second in number that of51–60. The two groups together comprised 62.4% of the totalsample studied. Education level of the respondents is shown inTable 2. A considerable proportion of the farmers (26%) either hadno education at all or did not complete the primary education,whereas a significant part of the farmers (48%) had completed theprimary education. No farmer had completed tertiary education.It must be noted here that the reported age and education levelsrefer only to the specific sample of participants in the regionssurveyed. Weighting across ages and education levels was notperformed and the sample does not reflect age and educationlevel of farmers at a national level.

Most farmers reported that they normally re-spray thetreated field area until the spraying tank is empty (54.9%) orthey apply the leftover solutions to another crop listed on theproduct label (30.2%) (χ2=101.3, pb0.001) (Table 3). Somefarmers (8.6%) reported that they apply the leftover solutionover a non-cropped area. Aminority of the farmers stated thatthey release the leftover solutions near or into irrigationcanals and streams (4.3%) or they store the leftover solutionfor another application (1.9%). Most farmers reported thateither they release the rinsates over a non-cropped area(45.7%) or they release the rinsates near or into irrigationcanals and streams (40.7%) (χ2=59.5, pb0.001) (Table 4). Fewfarmers (13.6%) stated that they apply the rinsates to thetreated field. A great proportion of the farmers said that theynormally dump the empty containers by the field (30.2%) orthey throw them near or into irrigation canals and streams(33.3%) (χ2=73.9, pb0.001) (Table 5). Throwing containers incommon waste places (11.1%) or burning containers in openfire (17.9%) was also reported. Few farmers stated that theycollect the empty containers and bury them (3.1%) or theycollect the empty containers for selling (2.5%) or they keep theempty containers for other uses (1.9%). Just over a third of thefarmers stated that they continue to use old pesticide forspraying (35.8%), whereas a smaller proportion said that theyburn old pesticides in their original containers (23.5%)(χ2=69.3, pb0.001) (Table 6). Some farmers claimed that theybuy only the amount of pesticides they need (17.3%) and someothers reported that they dump old pesticides in commonwaste places (16%).

Table 2 – Education of respondents

Education level No. %

None (or primary uncompleted) 42 25.9Primary 78 48.1Lower secondary 30 18.5Upper secondary 12 7.4Tertiary 0 0.0

washing the application equipment

Main attitude No. %

I apply the rinsates to the treated field 22 13.6I apply the rinsates over a non-cropped area 74 45.7I release the rinsates into or near irrigation canals orstreams

66 40.7

Farmers were asked to choose only one statement, which bestdescribed their case.

Re-spraying the treated areawith the leftover pesticide solutionis certainly a risky practice because this practice doubles therecommended rate on the crop often resulting in several majorproblems such as crop damage (phytotoxicity), unacceptableresidues in the harvested products, or harmful residues in thesoil. Similarly, disposing of the leftover solutions to non-cropped areas may pose a threat for surface water orgroundwater and pose a hazard to humans, domestic animals,and wildlife. Agricultural water pollution due to the intensifi-cation of agricultural practices and particularly due to thegrowing use of pesticides has an increasing impact on waterquality and is becoming a major concern not only in developedregions but also inmany developing countries. The best way todispose of any excess spray mixture is to find other nearbyfields that require an application of the same pesticide, butbefore spraying, farmersmust check the label tomake sure thatthe pesticide is registered for use on that crop (Ogg et al., 2001).

Disposing of the washing rinsates to non-cropped areas is arisky practice for the same reasons discussed earlier. From thestandpoint of practicality and economy, rinsing with cleanwater in the field at the site of application seems to be themostpreferredmethod of decontamination, since the rinsates can beadded to the spray tank and further utilized or disposed of overwide areas (Braun et al., 1983). Other methods of rinsatedisposal such as flushing the tank in a barnyard or drainingthe “dilute” material in a convenient place are illegal and theypresent a threat to surface and ground water, as well as otherparts of the environment. Reed et al. (2000) reported that mostfarmers in three Nebraska counties applied leftover dilutedchemical residues or rinsates evenly on the field just sprayed.

Dumping the empty containers by the field or throwingthem near or into irrigation canals and streams is a totallyunsafe practice and has been reported as amajor problem in a

Table 6 – Farmers' attitudes on disposing of old pesticidestocks

Main attitude No. %

I pour old pesticides on the ground 2 1.2I pour old pesticides down the sink/toilet/drains 2 1.2I bury old pesticides in their original containers 8 4.9I burn old pesticides in their original containers 38 23.5I dump old pesticides in common waste places 26 16.0I continue to use old pesticides for spraying 58 35.8I buy only the amount of pesticides I need 28 17.3

Farmers were asked to choose only one statement, which bestdescribed their case.

344 S C I E N C E O F T H E T O T A L E N V I R O N M E N T 3 9 0 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 3 4 1 – 3 4 5

number of studies (Avory and Coggon, 1994; London, 1994;Stewart, 1996;Yassin et al., 2002; Hurtig et al., 2003; Ntow et al.,2006; Recena et al., 2006). In addition, burning empty pesticidecontainers in open fire or burying empty containers shouldnot be used as a method of management of empty pesticidecontainers. Suppliers and distributors and even local author-ities often recommend these practices, but they are potentiallyhazardous to human health and the environment and shouldbe discouraged rather than, as happens at present, encour-aged. Safe burning techniques require a good understandingof pesticide chemistry, while safe burial requires adequateknowledge of local hydrology as well as of the environmentalbehaviour of pesticides. Many end users do not have suchknowledge or cannot apply it properly to their particularcircumstances. In many developing countries, empty pesti-cide containers are highly valued and sold or exchanged asstorage containers for other materials such as fuel, otherchemicals, and sometimes even food or water. Such practicesare dangerous and should be prevented, for example, bypuncturing any empty pesticide containers that cannot bereturned to the supplier.

Generally, obsolete or unwanted pesticides should bedisposed of as hazardous waste in a safe and environmentallysound manner according to relative legislation (FAO, 1999). Itmust be noted here that old pesticidesmentioned in this studyrefer only to small quantities of pesticides, although somefarmers tend to purchase greater quantities to achieve a lowerprice. Pesticides can only be reused if they meet the followingcriteria: they have not been banned and are approved for usein that territory, they are in good chemical and physicalcondition so that they are still effective as pesticides and willnot pose an unreasonable hazard to health or the environ-ment if they are used, the pesticides are in an appropriateform for end users to handle and apply them (PAN, 1998).Decisions regarding the chemical and physical state of thechemicals, their efficacy, repackaging, formulation or trans-port should only be made by specialists in appropriate fieldswho have access to analytical equipment and other testingfacilities. In general these questions should be referred to themanufacturer of the pesticides or experienced pesticidechemists, together with independent advisors who do nothave a commercial interest in the products or their fate.Burning old pesticides in open fire or burying old pesticidesshould not be used as a method of management of oldpesticides for the same reasons discussed earlier.

Table 5 – Farmers' attitudes on disposing of emptypesticide containers

Main attitude No. %

I dump the empty containers by the field 49 30.2I keep the empty containers for other uses 3 1.9I collect the empty containers and sell them 4 2.5I collect the empty containers and bury them 5 3.1I collect the empty containers and burn them 29 17.9I throw the empty containers in common waste places 18 11.1I throw the empty containers into irrigation canals orstreams

54 33.3

Farmers were asked to choose only one statement, which bestdescribed their case.

Findings of this survey further suggest that it is necessary toreduce possible health risks associated with pesticide use bydocumenting risk perceptions and developing ways of addres-sing them. In particular, documentation of pesticide riskperceptions is vital not only for identifying exposure situations,but also for implementing effective health and safety interven-tions, implementing effective alternative pest managementtechnologies, and also informing health and environmentalpolicy-makers. Risk-perception studies are importantapproaches in the development process of educative and risk-communication campaigns, bridging research to action. It isimperative for national authorities to develop a system ofpesticidewastemanagementwith all the necessary facilities at alocal level which will fulfil the requirements of waste legislationto prevent illegal dumping of pesticide waste. It is alsoimperative to increase farmers' awareness about possible risksof pesticide handling andparticularly about risks of uncontrolledpesticide waste disposal through education and training.

The present study provides a snapshot of the mostcommon practices of farmers of Pieria on disposal of pesticidewaste after use. It was based solely on information fromfarmers; no attempt was made to monitor or verify thereported attitudes in practice. The objective of the study wasprimarily descriptive with a view to an assessment of farmers'attitudes on the topic. As a self-report, it is possible that theremay be some inaccurate data such as people often wanting toreport socially desirable behaviours. Assurances for confiden-tiality and anonymity as well as the friendly way of theinterviews which gained the full confidence of the farmerskept this possibility to a minimum. Moreover, althoughsignificant trends in pesticide waste management arise fromthis survey, it would be wise not to generalize any conclusionsof this study regarding pesticide waste management at anational level due to the unpredictable variability in farmers'attitudes in respect with age, education level, awareness,experience with pesticides, training experience, and personalbeliefs and perceptions.

4. Conclusion

The results of this study indicated that farmers often showrisky behaviour when disposing pesticide waste after use andtherefore theremay be a high risk potential for environmentalcontamination during that phase of pesticide handling. Lack

345S C I E N C E O F T H E T O T A L E N V I R O N M E N T 3 9 0 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 3 4 1 – 3 4 5

of training or participation in educational programs aboutpesticide waste disposal may explain farmers' risky behaviouron this topic. Training programs which raise awareness offarmers of the potential hazards of pesticide use andparticularly of the proper management of waste products,recycling programs and collection systems for unwantedagricultural chemicals to prevent inappropriate waste dispos-al, as well as improving packaging of pesticides to minimizewaste production are essential for promoting safety during allphases of pesticide handling.

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge farmers who voluntarilyparticipated in the study.

R E F E R E N C E S

Avory G, Coggon D. Determinants of safe behaviour in farmerswhen working with pesticides. Occup Med 1994;44:236–8.

Braun HE, Morrow DC, Ripley BD, Frank R. Efficiency of waterrinsing for the decontamination of used pesticide containers.Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 1983;12:257–64.

Buczynska A, Szadkowska-Stanczyk I. Identification of healthhazards to rural population living near pesticide dump sites inPoland. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2005;18:331–9.

Clarke EEK, Levy LS, Spurgeon A, Calvert IA. The problemsassociated with pesticide use by irrigation workers in Ghana.Occup Med 1997;47:301–8.

Elfvendahl S, Mihale M, Kishimba MA, Kylin H. Pesticide pollutionremains severe after cleanup of a stockpile of obsoletepesticides at Vikuge, Tanzania. Ambio 2004;33:503–8.

FAO. Prevention of accumulation of obsolete pesticide stocks. FAOPesticide Disposal Series 2, Rome; 1999.

Felsot AS, Racke KD, Hamilton DJ. Disposal and degradation ofpesticide waste. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 2003;177:123–200.

Ferguson CC. Assessing risks from contaminated sites: policy andpractice in 16 European countries. Land Contam Reclam1999;7:33–54.

Hurtig AK, Sebastian MS, Soto A, Shingre A, Zambrano D, GuerreroW. Pesticide use among farmers in the Amazon Basin ofEcuador. Arch Environ Health 2003;58:223–8.

Ibitayo OO. Egyptian farmers' attitudes and behaviors regardingagricultural pesticides: Implications for pesticide riskcommunication. Risk Anal 2006;26:989–95.

London L. Agrichemical safety practices on farms in the WesternCape. S Afr Med J 1994;84:273–8.

Lu JL. Pesticide poisoning among cut-flower farmers. Toxicol Lett2006;164:S246–7.

Miles JR, Harris CR, Morrow DC. Assessment of hazards associatedwith pesticide container disposal and of rinsing procedures asa means of enabling disposal of pesticide containers insanitary landfills. J Environ Sci Health, Part B 1983;18:305–15.

Nesheim ON, Fishel FM. Proper disposal of pesticide waste. FloridaCooperative Extension Service, University of Florida,PI-18; 2005

Ntow WJ, Gijzen HJ, Kelderman P, Drechsel P. Farmer perceptionsand pesticide use practices in vegetable production in Ghana.Pest Manag Sci 2006;62:356–65.

Ogg CL, Schulze LD, Kamble ST. Safe transport, storage anddisposal of pesticides. Lincoln Extension Publications,University of Nebraska, EC2507; 2001.

PAN. Disposal of obsolete pesticides. Pest management notes.Pestic Action Netw 1998;3 London, UK.

Recena MCP, Caldas ED, Pires DX, Pontes ERJC. Pesticides exposurein Culturama, Brazil — knowledge, attitudes, and practices.Environ Res 2006;102:230–6.

Reed SD, Grisso RD,WoldtWE, Niemeyer SM.Waste assessment ofagricultural chemicals, petroleum products and maintenanceresiduals on farmsteads. Appl Eng Agric 2000;16:175–88.

Sinzogan AAC, Van Huis A, Kossou DK, Jiggins J, Vodouhè S.Farmers' knowledge and perception of cotton pests and pestcontrol practices in Benin: results of a diagnostic study.NJAS — Wageningen J Life Sci 2004;52:285–303.

Sivanesan SD, Krishnamurthi K, Wachasunder SD, Chakrabarti T.Genotoxicity of pesticide waste contaminated soil and itsleachate. Biomed Environ Sci 2004;17:257–65.

Stewart DJ. Pesticide use, habits and health awareness amongEgyptian farmers. Ambio 1996;25:425–6.

Whitford F, Martin AG, Becovitz JD. Pesticides and containermanagement, PPP-21. Purdue University CooperativeExtension Service; 2001.

YassinMM, AbuMourad TA, Safi JM. Knowledge, attitude, practice,and toxicity symptoms associated with pesticide use amongfarm workers in the Gaza Strip. Occup Environ Med2002;59:387–93.