US public will pay for better residue standards

Public perceptions in the US of the risks and the benefits of agrochemicals can influence government and business decisions regarding use and development, according to a recent report by the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST). A growing body of research is improving scientific understanding of these perceptions and their impact on food purchases. Contrary to popular belief, perceptions of risks from residues of agrochemicals differ greatly among members of the public. About one-quarter of those asked perceives a great chance of harm from pesticide residues in food, and about the same proportion perceives little or no harm.

    Government and business tend to respond most readily to the concerns consumers have over residues in food. The CAST report, however, suggests that the public is also aware of agrochemicals in relation to the environment and agricultural workers. Moreover the majority of the public does not trust government to set or to enforce safety standards, or farmers to ensure that the foods they sell are safe. The public generally believes that pests need to be controlled but also believes that there are effective alternatives to pesticides. Because about half the public does not consider that these alternatives are more costly, they perceive few benefits from pesticide use.

    There is evidence that the public is willing to pay more for tougher pesticide residue standards and better enforcement. Consumers differ greatly in their willingness to seek out foods labelled ‘pesticide free’.  

Public perceptions of agrochemicals by Eileen O van Ravenswaay of the Dept. of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing is available from CAST, 4420 West Lincoln Way, Ames, Iowa, 50014-3447, US $10.00, 35pp.

[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No.27, March 1995, page 21]