Abstract
In 2023, the European Union will vote on the reauthorization of glyphosate use, renewed in 2017 despite concern on impacts on the environment and public health. A ban is supported by several Member States but rejected by most farmers. What are citizens’ preferences to phase out glyphosate? To assess whether taxation could be an alternative to a ban, we conducted a discrete choice experiment in five European countries. Our results reveal that the general public is strongly willing to pay for a reduction in glyphosate use. However, while 75.5% of respondents stated to support a ban in the pre-experimental survey, experimental results reveal that in 73.35% of cases, earmarked taxation schemes are preferred when they lead to a strong reduction in glyphosate use for an increase in food price lower than that induced by a ban. When glyphosate reduction is balanced against its costs, a tax may be preferred.
Funder
French National Research Agency
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Reference37 articles.
1. Why Europe may ban the most popular weed killer in the world;E. Stokstad;Science,2016
2. Explaining growing glyphosate use: The political economy of herbicide-dependent agriculture;J. Clapp;Global Environmental Change,2021
3. Support Austria’s glyphosate ban;W. Peng;Science,2020
4. France’s decade-old effort to slash pesticide use failed. Will a new attempt succeed?;E. Stokstad;Science,2018
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献