Since EU lost its share of the Endosulfan pie when it went generic decades ago, their recent promotion of patented pesticides is only part of its attempt to re-enter global pesticide trade. Since their attempts to compete with Indian Endosulfan producers and regain their lost markets did not meet with success, some of them are understood to have resorted to unfair trade practices. By churning out unfavourable stories surrounding Endosulfan through patronage to certain NGOs, the EU appears to be out to recapture their markets by any means possible. Now, in order to counter the affordability, utility and beneficial softness of Endosulfan, EU is engaging in illegal attempts to introduce Endosulfan as a Persistent Organic Pollutant in the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions. They hope that a total ban will initiate a shift in global pesticide demand patterns.
Endosulfan is a broad-spectrum pesticide active ingredient that is sprayed on a range of 29 crops to protect them from about 60 types of pests. The most prominent benefit of Endosulfan over other pesticides, including those touted as its replacements, is that it is safe for beneficials and pollinators, such as honeybees. Endosulfan is the last pesticide in use that is recommended as a first-spray during pollination by agriculture scientists and entomologists worldwide. The replacement of Endosulfan would not only result in incalculable and irreplaceable harm to biodiversity and the agriculture ecosystem, but also present an additional cost of pollination to farmers. Since India became a prominent Endosulfan producer, India’s farmers have trusted its use in a variety of crops, especially coffee, tea and cotton. The states of Maharashtra, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh are the top consumers of Endosulfan in India. More than 12 million litres of Endosulfan is used here per annum. In order to be popularly accepted, any substitute for Endosulfan will have to possess similar attributes.
Imidachloprid (Rs 2,000/litre), Thiamethoxam (Rs 3,200/litre) and Coregen (Rs 700/litre) are the pesticides promoted as replacements for Endosulfan. Presently, the Indian farmer spends Rs 250/litre for Endosulfan. Therefore, the obvious repercussion of a shift from using Endosulfan is the manifold increase in the cost of pest-protection. The next cost to emerge with the replacement of Endosulfan is that of the potential purchase of bee boxes. Bee boxes cost as much as Rs 90,000 for pollinating a 1-hectare field of crops in the absence of honeybees. Wherever Endosulfan has been substituted by more expensive alternatives like Neonicotinoids, it has resulted in the elimination of pollinators. Imidachloprid, the most popular Neonicotinoid is blamed for killing bees and is banned in France, Germany and Slovenia, among other European nations.
Affordability as a factor will be an impossible offering for patented pesticides from the EU. If the European agenda to free up a brand new market by banning Endosulfan meets success, farmers in developing nations and India in particular, will be left in financial ruin. If they consider options touted by local governments, they will have to rely on methods like organic farming. This means risking their produce for a method that if successful, may not possess the effectiveness for a required scale. News reports suggest that the present situation has now compelled farmers in Kerala, where Endosulfan is banned, to resort to smuggling the pesticide into the state in cans and bottles. The clash of ‘patented versus generics’ threatens to leave many such innocents in a lurch.
Showing posts with label kerala kasargod. Show all posts
Showing posts with label kerala kasargod. Show all posts
Monday, April 18, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Endosulfan: ryots want to be impleaded
Farmers from Gulbarga on Wednesday filed a miscellaneous petition in the high court to implead them in a petition filed by Endosulfan Manufacturers’ and Formulators’ Welfare Association (EMFWA) challenging the endosulfan ban imposed by the government.
The farmers claimed that they did not have any harmful effect after using the pesticide for the past two to three years. “The ban is against the expert committee report formed by the government to study the effects of endosulfan use in 2004. The ban affects the livelihood of about 5,000 people who are employed in the industry,” said the petitioners’ lawyer.
The government had banned endosulfan on February 19, 2010 on the basis of disability and diseases caused by the pesticide in several villages of Dakshina Kannada District.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Do we really have alternatives to Endosulfan?
In India, the use of Endosulfan is much more critical. It is the most widely used generic pesticide in India with significant use in crops such as cotton, pulses, tea, mango, vegetables and oilseeds. It is the only pesticide which is soft on pollinating insects such as honeybees and beneficial insects such as ladybird beetles and chrysoperla, among others. In fact, Endosulfan is widely recommended for use during pollination and in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Insect Resistance Management (IRM) programs globally. Farmers in Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh are the largest users of Endosulfan in India, each using more than a million liters of the generic contact pesticide. They will stand to lose most of all in case of a move to ban the nation-wide use of Endosulfan. The alternatives available to them are expensive, and not nearly as effective on precious cash-crops.
Cost Comparison: Endosulfan and its Alternatives
Product | MRP per Lt or Kg | Cost per acre | ||
Cotton | Veg | Paddy | ||
Endosulfan 35% EC | 286 | 114 | 46 | 69 |
Flubendiamide 39.35 SC | 13800 | 690 | 276 | |
Chlorantraniliprole 18.5 SC | 12280 | 737 | 246 | 737 |
Emamectin Benzoate 5% SG | 8400 | 739 | 672 | |
Flubendiamide 20% WG | 7434 | 743 | 372 | |
Thiamethoxam actera | 4010 | 321 | 321 | 160 |
Indoxacarb 14.5 SC | 3400 | 680 | 544 |
India’s premier agricultural university, Punjab Agricultural University, which in 2007 compared bio-efficacy of all contemporary insecticides, ranked Endosulfan as the best and most ideal for use in cotton crops.
Performance of various insecticides against insect pests and safety to natural enemies of cotton
Insecticides | Insect Pests | Natural enemies | Remarks | |||||
J | W | PBW/SBW | ABW | TC | ||||
Young | Grown up | |||||||
Endosulfan | Good | Good | Good | Good | Poor | Very good | Safe | Safer to the natural enemies, low resistance to ABW early in the season |
Synthetic pyrethroids | ||||||||
Poor | Poor | Very poor | Poor | Poor | Poor | Toxic | Excessive use can cause resurgence of whitefly and ABW, high level of resistance to ABW |
J= Jassid; W= Whitefly; SBW= Spotted bollworm; PBW= Pink bollworm; ABW= American bollworm; TC= Tobacco caterpillar
Source: Punjab Agricultural University, India
Source: Punjab Agricultural University, India
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)