prompt david pendlington unilever sustainable agriculture project co-ordinator
TRANSCRIPT
PRoMPT
David PendlingtonUnilever Sustainable Agriculture
Project Co-ordinator
A software system to evaluate the environmental and human health impacts of pesticide use in agriculture.
Simple but meaningful RISK-BASED indicators on - Leaching potential- Aquatic eco-toxicity- Terrestrial eco-toxicity- Operator risk
…with minimum data input required by user
- To inform choice on pest control options- To track progress towards more ‘sustainable’ use- To compare growers, regions or supply chains
What is PRoMPT?
How does it work?
What can it be usedfor?
Structure
User data
Four risk indicators• Groundwater risk• Aquatic eco-tox• Terrestrial eco-tox• Operator risk
Algorithms
Pesticide database
PRPROOMPTMPT
1 3
2
4
User data
Input• Location (lat, lon) and distance to water courses• Active Ingredients (AI) used• Application rate, technique, date• Irrigation
1PRPROOMPTMPT
1
Pesticide database
• Substance data, mainly from public domain• Toxicological & physico-chemical endpoints• Augmented with data from manufacturers• About 600 substances
2PRPROOMPTMPT
2
Algorithms
Example: Leaching to groundwater
R = L / ADIRisk Indicator
Predicted average daily leaching loss
Human Allowable DailyIntake (Toxicity)
Leaching prediction Layered mass balance model Global drainage data set Adjustment for irrigation
3PRPROOMPTMPT
3
Location-specific drainage is derived from the output of water balance model (Vörösmarty et al., 1998 J. Hydrol. 207, 147ff).
Grower location(lat and lon)
Predicted mean monthly runoff for SE Australia
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec
Month
Ru
no
ff (
mm
)
NB - Long-term average
values NOT site and year specific!
VERY approximate!
Mean Monthly Flux (mm/month)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Month
Flu
x (m
m /
mo
nth
)
Algorithms
Other risk indicators similar to Groundwater• Potential exposure vs. toxicity threshold• Standard screening-level toxicology• Simple exposure models
3PRPROOMPTMPT
3
Output: Four risk indicators• Leaching to groundwater• Aquatic eco-toxicity• Terrestrial eco-toxicity• Operator risk
For each risk indicator and each AI, risks are classed as
<10 Low Risk → 1 point 10-100 Medium Risk → 3 points >100 High Risk → 9 points
4 PRPROOMPTMPT
4
Applications
1. To inform choice on pest control options
2. To track progress towards more ‘sustainable’ use
3. To compare growers, regions or supply chains
Scenario A B C D E
Active Ingredient Ethion Quinalphos Deltamethrin Endosulfan Phosphamidon
Rate (g AI ha-1) 250 190 4 122.5 144.5
Example 1 a: Inform choice on pest control options
Five control options for thrips recommended by the Indian Tea Board and the Indian Pesticide Board
Effect of No-Spray Zone in spinach growing (Italy)profile for individual A.I.’s with and without No Spray Zone (NSZ)
Example 1b : Inform choice on pest control options
Effect of No-Spray Zone in spinach growing (Italy)profile for individual A.I.’s with and without No Spray Zone (NSZ)
Example 1b : Inform choice on pest control options
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
(a) (b)
Example 2: Track progress towards ‘sustainable’ use
Growing tomatoes sustainably in Australia
Example 3: compare growers, regions or supply chains
Comparing Grower Profiles: Eleven (A – K) brassica growers in Eastern England
Problem growers or growers with problems?
Limitations (1)
• PRoMPT can not ‘make’ the choice whether to use a particular pesticide or not. This will depend on additional factors, such as– risk of residues in product– efficacy & risk of crop damage– alternative pest control measures available– action thresholds– national registration– black or white lists and reputation– availability & cost.
Limitations (2)
• PRoMPT will not safeguard against or inform on the effects of bad practice, e.g. – insufficient operator training– not using proper Personal Protective Equipment– bad storage, use and disposal of pesticides.
THANK YOU!