A Decision-Support Grid for Evaluating Neonicotinoid Alternatives Based on Environmental and Human Health Impact

The European Union’s goal to reduce pesticide risk, exemplified by restrictions on insecticides like neonicotinoids, necessitates a shift from single-substance risk assessment to a holistic evaluation of pest control strategies. To address this, a novel decision-support grid was developed that integrates 13 environmental, biodiversity, and human health risk indicators for multiple active substances across an entire crop season into a single Final Scenario Score (FSS), ranging from 0 to 1 (where 1 is the risk of the reference scenario). This framework was applied to three case studies in Belgium—sugar beet, apple, and pear cultivation—where neonicotinoid-based reference scenarios were compared with chemical and/or organic alternatives under low (best-case) and high (worst-case) pest pressure conditions. The results highlight the complexity of finding viable alternatives, with an FSS below 0.75 as the justification threshold. In sugar beet, only the best-case chemical alternative (FSS = 0.71) met the threshold, while worst-case chemical alternatives failed due to increased risk. For apple and pear, organic alternatives consistently showed low-risk scores (FSS 0.27–0.61) but faced important efficacy gaps against key insect. Chemical alternatives in orchards were justifiable in low-pressure scenarios (FSS 0.64–0.73) but failed under high pest pressure (FSS 0.91–0.93). This novel decision-support grid proves to be a valuable tool for guiding sustainable pest control strategies for regulators and field advisors.