Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology: Investment and Economic Returns | 521

Table 8-15. Positive contributions of AKST for human health by sector.

Sector

AKST product

Consequences for human health

Data availability for economic quantification

Crops

Micronutrient trait in crop varieties

Prevent human diseases

Ex-ante assessments for Biofortification

Livestock

Animal Protein

Balanced diet

Unknown

Aquaculture

Animal Protein and micronutirents

Balanced diet

Unknown

Forestry

Non-timber products and food from natural resources

Prevent food insecurity

Unknown

Source: Authors’ elaboration.

figures are not collected systematically or on a regular basis; estimation of the incidence of pesticide poisoning is difficult as surveillance systems may be inadequate and tend to un-derreport (PAHO, 2002; London and Bailie, 2001). Hence official reports represent lower bound estimates. Farmers in the developing world experience high rates of exposure to human health risks when using pesticides (Jeyaratnam et al., 1982 and 1987; Kishi et al., 1995; Ajayi, 2000; Rola and Pingali, 1993; Antle et al., 1998; Crissman et al., 1994 and 1998). Some authors (Cuyno et al., 2001; Garming and Waibel, 2006) established that farmers reveal a willingness to pay for reducing the negative health effects from chemical pesticides.
Economic studies carried out in industrialized countries found that health costs make up about 10% of the total ex-

 

ternality costs of pesticides (Pimentel et al., 1993ab; Waibel et al., 1999). Pesticide use globally continues to rise and hence the concerns about the implications for human health remain (Ecobichon, 2001).
        Considerable AKST investments were made by the pub­lic and the private sector to minimize the negative health effects of pesticides. These investments included two major products, safe use technology packages and IPM. Chemi­cal companies have developed modules on safe use training, which is an example of a private sector AKST. Pilot projects were carried out in Mexico, India and Zimbabwe (Atkin and Leisinger, 2000), Guatemala, Kenya and Thailand (Hurst, 1999). Successes were very limited; Farmers often went back to their old practices shortly after the training (Atkin and Leisinger, 2000). In addition, some safe use technolo-

Table 8-1 6. Negative effects of AKST for human health by sector.

Sector
Crops

Type of effect
Water pollution with pesticides and nitrogen fertilizer
Air pollution (e.g., transport, fertilizers production, deforestation)

Consequences
Acute and chronic diseases
Intoxication/death from drinking water
Respiratory and allergic diseases

Data availability for economic quantification
Case studies including economic evaluations and occasional country statistics
Statistics and case studies mainly in developed countries
Unknown

Livestock

Increase of cheap meat production and consumption
Antibiotics use Water pollution with animal wastes
Air pollution (transport, GHG emissions, deforestation)
| Increasing animal trade

Obesity (cancer, diabetes, coronary diseases)
Increasing resistance to antibiotics
Intoxication/death from drinking water
Respiratory and allergic diseases Increasing number of zoonosis

Studies mainly for the U.S.
Few studies Unknown
Unknown Recent studies

Aquaculture

Antibiotics use Air pollution (transport)
Residues in aquaculture feed (mercury, dioxins, polychlorinated bromides

Increasing resistance to antibiotics Respiratory and allergic diseases Intoxication, neurotoxicity

Few studies Unknown Few studies