The Experts below are selected from a list of 5364 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Patrice Marchand - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
evolution of the biocontrol active substances in the framework of the european Pesticide Regulation ec no 1107 2009
Pest Management Science, 2019Co-Authors: Diane C Robin, Patrice MarchandAbstract:BACKGROUND: The use of biocontrol agents (BCA) is growing strongly with a market of €1.9 billion worldwide and €542 million in Europe, and an estimated annual growth of between 15% and 20%. Biocontrol substances use natural mechanisms as part of integrated pest management. With the exception of macro‐organisms, substances or products comprising microorganisms, semiochemicals and natural substances depend on plant protection Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009. RESULTS: When this Regulation came into force, a number of BCA had already been approved. The total number of BCA rose during the period 2011–2018 to ∼ 60 substances in line with global growth in approved substances. This growth was not smooth or equal between biocontrol categories; the microorganisms category increased the most, with a doubling of the number of approved substances in use, followed by natural substances and semiochemicals. CONCLUSION: This positive development has been influenced by many factors such as scientific advances and environmental characteristics. However, some obstacles remain that limit the development of BCA (market size, variability in effectiveness, etc.). Regulatory measures could be a key to enhancing the development of biocontrol registrations. © 2018 Society of Chemical Industry
-
Basic Substances under EU Pesticide Regulation: An Opportunity for Organic Production?
Organic Farming, 2017Co-Authors: Patrice MarchandAbstract:Some of the active substances allowed in organic production are now approved as basic sub- stances under the EU plant protection products Regulation. Previously, all organic farming permitted active substances were approved as conventional plant protection products. In accordance with the criteria of Article 23 of the EU Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, basic substances are granted without maximum residue limits and have a good prospect for being included in Annex II of organic farming Regulation (EC) 889/2008. In fact, most of them are already permitted in organic farming. At this stage, it seems desirable to organize applications in order to avoid duplications and to clarify strategy across Europe. This organization should be planned in order to identify corresponding knowledge and data from field experiments, and to further constitute the most crucial issues related to organic production. A work of this nature was initially supported by IFOAM-EU for lecithin, calcium hydroxide and Quassia extract. The Institut Technique de l’Agriculture Biologique (ITAB) was previously engaged in a large-scale approval plan motivated by the continuous demand for the regularization of compounds/substances already in use and has a mandate for testing and approving new compatible substances. Thus, the horsetail extract (Equisetum arvense) was the first approved basic substance and ITAB has obtained 11 of the 15 basic substances approved at the EU level.
-
basic substances an opportunity for approval of low concern substances under eu Pesticide Regulation
Pest Management Science, 2015Co-Authors: Patrice MarchandAbstract:Plant extracts and byproducts furnish various alternative products for crop protection and are traditionally used by farmers. However, the cost and timeframe for their registration as active substances are prohibitive for small companies and farmers' associations with the new Plant Protection Products (PPP) Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009. However, there is now a possibility of registering light compounds as 'basic substances', a new category described in Article 23 and in 'Whereas/Recital 18'. We developed a regulatory expertise on the approval of such products within the framework of the PPP Regulation. A Draft Assessment Report in one volume was established, later transformed by EC Directorate into a Basic Substance Application Template, and subsequently used by the EC as a matrix for the corresponding Guidelines for applicants (SANCO 10363/2012 rev. 9). Here we provide further tools, consisting of methodological, linguistic and strategic recommendations in order to constitute a Basic Substance Application (BSA) and proceed to its registration. While the use of alternative agents for crop protection is increasing both in organic and conventional agriculture, these usages are still considered as 'minor uses'. Our approach and tools are valuable to non-PPP specialised applicants for simplifying and facilitating their submission of the BSA.
Duncan Mcduiera - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
policymaking under the radar a case study of Pesticide Regulation to prevent intentional poisoning in sri lanka
Health Policy and Planning, 2015Co-Authors: Melissa Pearson, Gamini Manuweera, Nicholas A Buckley, Andrew H. Dawson, Ravindra Fernando, Duncan McduieraAbstract:Methods: This study was undertaken as part of a broader analysis of policy in two parts— an explanatory case study and stakeholder analysis. This article describes the explanatory case study that included an historical narrative and in-depth interviews. Results: A timeline and chronology of policy actions and influence were derived from interview and document data. Fourteen key informants were interviewed and four distinct policy phases were identified. The early stages of Pesticide Regulation were dominated by political and economic considerations and strongly influenced by external factors. The second phase was marked by a period of local institution building, the engagement of local stakeholders, and expanded links between health and agriculture. During the third phase the problem of self-poisoning dominated the policy agenda and closer links between stakeholders, evidence and policymaking developed. The fourth and most recent phase was characterized by strong local capacity for policymaking, informed by evidence, developed in collaboration with a powerful network of stakeholders, including international researchers. Conclusions: The policy response to extremely high rates of suicide from intentional poisoning with Pesticides shows a unique and successful example of policymaking to prevent suicide. It also highlights policy action taking place ‘under the radar’, thus avoiding policy inertia often associated with reforms in lower and middle income countries.
Juan Jose Villaverde - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
trends in analysis of Pesticide residues to fulfil the european Regulation ec no 1107 2009
Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2016Co-Authors: Juan Jose Villaverde, Beatriz Sevillamoran, Carmen Lopezgoti, Jose Luis Alonsoprados, Pilar SandinespanaAbstract:Abstract The legislative requirements and the concern about the harmful effects of Pesticide residues have encouraged the development of methods to determine Pesticides at trace levels in/on matrices of concern. The purpose of this work is to provide a state of art about the trends in the analysis of Pesticide residues within the agrochemical sector, in order to fulfil the European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 requirements. Promising emerging methodologies and novel instrumental techniques are also highlighted.
-
Trends in analysis of Pesticide residues to fulfil the European Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009
TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2016Co-Authors: Juan Jose Villaverde, Beatriz Sevilla-morán, Carmen López-goti, José Luis Alonso-prados, Pilar Sandín-españaAbstract:Abstract The legislative requirements and the concern about the harmful effects of Pesticide residues have encouraged the development of methods to determine Pesticides at trace levels in/on matrices of concern. The purpose of this work is to provide a state of art about the trends in the analysis of Pesticide residues within the agrochemical sector, in order to fulfil the European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 requirements. Promising emerging methodologies and novel instrumental techniques are also highlighted.
-
bioPesticides in the framework of the european Pesticide Regulation ec no 1107 2009
Pest Management Science, 2014Co-Authors: Juan Jose Villaverde, Beatriz Sevillamoran, Pilar Sandinespana, Carmen Lopezgoti, Jose Luis AlonsopradosAbstract:Background The European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 encourages the use of less harmful active substances. Two main concerns involve the application of cut-off criteria for Pesticides without losing tools for future agriculture (especially for minor uses) and the implementation of zonal evaluations. BioPesticides are considered to have lower risks than synthetic Pesticides; consequently, there is strong interest for their use in integrated pest management practices. Results This paper provides an analysis of the current European situation, starting with the first attempts to regulate the use of plant protection products and focusing on the implications of the new legislative criteria for bioPesticides. Conclusion It is important to be aware that bioPesticides are still Pesticides and fall under the same Regulations as their synthetic counterparts. Although manufacturers are still reluctant to commit to such alternatives due to difficulties with approval and registration, bioPesticides could be alternatives for traditional plant protection products, either as a base for the synthesis of new products or integrated with traditional plant protection products. In addition, bioPesticides have to be used only as indicated on the label, which provides critical information about how to safely handle and use plant protection products.
-
BioPesticides in the framework of the European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009.
Pest Management Science, 2013Co-Authors: Juan Jose Villaverde, Beatriz Sevilla-morán, Pilar Sandín-españa, Carmen López-goti, José Luis Alonso-pradosAbstract:Background The European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 encourages the use of less harmful active substances. Two main concerns involve the application of cut-off criteria for Pesticides without losing tools for future agriculture (especially for minor uses) and the implementation of zonal evaluations. BioPesticides are considered to have lower risks than synthetic Pesticides; consequently, there is strong interest for their use in integrated pest management practices. Results This paper provides an analysis of the current European situation, starting with the first attempts to regulate the use of plant protection products and focusing on the implications of the new legislative criteria for bioPesticides. Conclusion It is important to be aware that bioPesticides are still Pesticides and fall under the same Regulations as their synthetic counterparts. Although manufacturers are still reluctant to commit to such alternatives due to difficulties with approval and registration, bioPesticides could be alternatives for traditional plant protection products, either as a base for the synthesis of new products or integrated with traditional plant protection products. In addition, bioPesticides have to be used only as indicated on the label, which provides critical information about how to safely handle and use plant protection products.
Pilar Sandinespana - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
trends in analysis of Pesticide residues to fulfil the european Regulation ec no 1107 2009
Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2016Co-Authors: Juan Jose Villaverde, Beatriz Sevillamoran, Carmen Lopezgoti, Jose Luis Alonsoprados, Pilar SandinespanaAbstract:Abstract The legislative requirements and the concern about the harmful effects of Pesticide residues have encouraged the development of methods to determine Pesticides at trace levels in/on matrices of concern. The purpose of this work is to provide a state of art about the trends in the analysis of Pesticide residues within the agrochemical sector, in order to fulfil the European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 requirements. Promising emerging methodologies and novel instrumental techniques are also highlighted.
-
bioPesticides in the framework of the european Pesticide Regulation ec no 1107 2009
Pest Management Science, 2014Co-Authors: Juan Jose Villaverde, Beatriz Sevillamoran, Pilar Sandinespana, Carmen Lopezgoti, Jose Luis AlonsopradosAbstract:Background The European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 encourages the use of less harmful active substances. Two main concerns involve the application of cut-off criteria for Pesticides without losing tools for future agriculture (especially for minor uses) and the implementation of zonal evaluations. BioPesticides are considered to have lower risks than synthetic Pesticides; consequently, there is strong interest for their use in integrated pest management practices. Results This paper provides an analysis of the current European situation, starting with the first attempts to regulate the use of plant protection products and focusing on the implications of the new legislative criteria for bioPesticides. Conclusion It is important to be aware that bioPesticides are still Pesticides and fall under the same Regulations as their synthetic counterparts. Although manufacturers are still reluctant to commit to such alternatives due to difficulties with approval and registration, bioPesticides could be alternatives for traditional plant protection products, either as a base for the synthesis of new products or integrated with traditional plant protection products. In addition, bioPesticides have to be used only as indicated on the label, which provides critical information about how to safely handle and use plant protection products.
Ruth E. Malone - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Tobacco Industry and Pesticide Regulations: Case Studies from Tobacco Industry Archives
2005Co-Authors: Patricia A. Mcdaniel, Gina Solomon, Ruth E. MaloneAbstract:Tobacco is a heavily Pesticide-dependent crop. Because Pesticides involve human safety and health issues, they are regulated nationally and internationally; however, little is known about how tobacco companies respond to regulatory pressures regarding Pesticides. This study analyzes internal tobacco industry documents to describe industry activities aimed at influencing Pesticide Regulations. We use a case study approach based on examination of approximately 2,000 internal company documents and 3,885 pages of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests. The cases involve methoprene, the ethylene bisdithiocarbamates, and phosphine. We show how the tobacco industry successfully altered the outcome in two cases by hiring ex-agency scientists to write reports favorable to industry positions regarding Pesticide Regulations for national (Environmental Protection Agency) and international (World Health Organization) regulatory bodies. We also show how the industry worked to forestall tobacco Pesticide Regulation by attempting to self-regulate in Europe, and how Philip Morris encouraged a Pesticide manufacturer to apply for higher tolerance levels in Malaysia and Europe while keeping tobacco industry interest a secret from government regulators. This study suggests that the tobacco industry is capable of exerting considerable influence over the Pesticide regulatory process and that increased scrutiny of this process and protection of the public interest in Pesticide Regulation may be warranted.
-
The Tobacco Industry and Pesticide Regulations: Case Studies from Tobacco Industry Archives
Environmental Health Perspectives, 2005Co-Authors: Patricia A. Mcdaniel, Gina Solomon, Ruth E. MaloneAbstract:Tobacco is a heavily Pesticide-dependent crop. Because Pesticides involve human safety and health issues, they are regulated nationally and internationally; however, little is known about how tobacco companies respond to regulatory pressures regarding Pesticides. In this study we analyzed internal tobacco industry documents to describe industry activities aimed at influencing Pesticide Regulations. We used a case study approach based on examination of approximately 2,000 internal company documents and 3,885 pages of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests. The cases involved methoprene, the ethylene bisdithiocarbamates, and phosphine. We show how the tobacco industry successfully altered the outcome in two cases by hiring ex-agency scientists to write reports favorable to industry positions regarding Pesticide Regulations for national (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) and international (World Health Organization) regulatory bodies. We also show how the industry worked to forestall tobacco Pesticide Regulation by attempting to self-regulate in Europe, and how Philip Morris encouraged a Pesticide manufacturer to apply for higher tolerance levels in Malaysia and Europe while keeping tobacco industry interest a secret from government regulators. This study suggests that the tobacco industry is able to exert considerable influence over the Pesticide regulatory process and that increased scrutiny of this process and protection of the public interest in Pesticide Regulation may be warranted.