A REGIONAL BUDGET SYSTEM FOR PESTICIDE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS-FIRST ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT: THE CASE FOR CHANGE

EU pesticide regulation assesses substances and their agronomic uses individually. Yet environmental impacts arise from the combined pressure of multiple substances across entire landscapes over time. EU environmental law, including the Water Framework Directive, Nature Restoration Law, and Natura 2000 obligations, requires ecological outcomes at the landscape scale. The current regulatory method cannot deliver these outcomes. Each ecological region (aligned with WFD river basin districts) receives an annual toxic-unit (TU) budget. Each pesticide carries a TU value based on its ecotoxicological profile, application rate, and persistence. Farmers register intended applications digitally through CAP land parcel systems. If budget remains, the application is confirmed. This manages cumulative pesticide pressure against a defined ecological carrying capacity. Denmark already operates the necessary infrastructure: mandatory digital pesticide reporting, high-resolution parcel data, and catchment-level groundwater monitoring. No new systems are required; the regulatory logic is extended, not replaced. Systemic regulatory budget setting is new in chemical legislation but is a proven concept to operationalise regulation and incentivise business transformation to meet sustainability goals e.g. reduce CO2-emissions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2026-05-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3897/arphapreprints.e200193
Primary Topic
Environmental Conservation and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A REGIONAL BUDGET SYSTEM FOR PESTICIDE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS-FIRST ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT: THE CASE FOR CHANGE

James Henty Williams, Christopher John Topping, Johan Axelman
Environmental Conservation and Management
article

A REGIONAL BUDGET SYSTEM FOR PESTICIDE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS-FIRST ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT: THE CASE FOR CHANGE

James Henty Williams, Christopher John Topping, Johan Axelman
article en

Abstract

EU pesticide regulation assesses substances and their agronomic uses individually. Yet environmental impacts arise from the combined pressure of multiple substances across entire landscapes over time. EU environmental law, including the Water Framework Directive, Nature Restoration Law, and Natura 2000 obligations, requires ecological outcomes at the landscape scale. The current regulatory method cannot deliver these outcomes. Each ecological region (aligned with WFD river basin districts) receives an annual toxic-unit (TU) budget. Each pesticide carries a TU value based on its ecotoxicological profile, application rate, and persistence. Farmers register intended applications digitally through CAP land parcel systems. If budget remains, the application is confirmed. This manages cumulative pesticide pressure against a defined ecological carrying capacity. Denmark already operates the necessary infrastructure: mandatory digital pesticide reporting, high-resolution parcel data, and catchment-level groundwater monitoring. No new systems are required; the regulatory logic is extended, not replaced. Systemic regulatory budget setting is new in chemical legislation but is a proven concept to operationalise regulation and incentivise business transformation to meet sustainability goals e.g. reduce CO2-emissions.

Aarhus University (DK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Environmental Conservation and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.