Carrots and Sticks: Incentives and Regulations for Herbicide Resistance Management and Changing Behavior

Abstract

Although the problem of herbicide resistance is not new, the widespread evolution of glyphosate resistance in weed species such as Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeriS. Wats.), common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudisSauer), and kochia [Kochia scoparia(L.) Schrad.] raised awareness throughout the agricultural community of herbicide resistance as a problem. Glyphosate-resistant weeds resulted in the loss of a simple, single herbicide option to control a wide spectrum of weeds that gave efficacious and economical weed management in corn (Zea maysL.), soybean [Glycine max(L.) Merr.], and cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) crops engineered for tolerance to this herbicide and planted over widespread areas of the South and Midwest of the United States. Beyond these crops, glyphosate is used for vegetation management in other cropping systems and in noncrop areas across the United States, and resistance to this herbicide threatens its continued utility in all of these situations. This, combined with the development of multiple herbicide-resistant weeds and the lack of commercialization of herbicides with new mechanisms of action over the past years (Duke 2012), caused the weed science community to realize that stewardship of existing herbicide resources, extending their useful life as long as possible, is imperative. Further, while additional herbicide tolerance traits are being incorporated into crops, weed management in these crops will still be based upon using existing, old, herbicide chemistries.