- Corpus ID: 212731689
Labor Market Dynamics and Development∗
- Kevin F. Donovan , Will Jianyu Lu , Todd Schoellman
- Published 2020
- Economics, Sociology
Figures and Tables from this paper
39 Citations
Discussion paper series misallocation and inequality.
- Highly Influenced
Labor Market Power, Self-Employment, and Development
Labor market anatomy of a macroeconomic crisis, labor market fluidity and human capital accumulation, differences in on-the-job learning across firms, the role of labor market frictions in structural transformation*, young adults and labor markets in africa, can temporary wage incentives increase formal employment experimental evidence from mexico, worker turnover and job reallocation: evidence from matched employer-employee data, nber working paper series the effects of climate change on labor and capital reallocation, 87 references, worker flows and wage growth over the life-cycle: a cross-country analysis, the flow approach to labor markets: new data sources and micro-macro links, tackling youth unemployment: evidence from a labor market experiment in uganda, life cycle wage growth across countries, unemployment and development, job creation and wages in least developed countries: evidence from sub-saharan africa, wage employment, unemployment and self-employment across countries, specific capital, mobility, and wages: wages rise with job seniority, labor market search, informality and schooling investments, related papers.
Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers
Kondratiev, Long Cycles and Economic Conjuncture
Cite this chapter.
- Vincent Barnett 2
Part of the book series: Studies in Russian and East European History and Society ((SREEHS))
58 Accesses
Kondratiev first mentioned the idea of long cycles in print in the mono-graph The World Economy and its Conjuncture During and After the War (Mirovoe khozyaistvo i ego kon”yunktury vo vremya i posle voiny) published in 1922, and an account of this pioneering presentation is given below. Kondratiev’s first paper devoted specifically to long cycles was published in Questions of Conjuncture (Voprosy kon”yunktury) in 1925, and a version of this paper was translated and published in The Review of Economic Statistics in 1935. On 6 February 1926 Kondratiev read an expanded and revised version of his account of long cycles in the Institute of Economics in Moscow. This was a grand affair as the paper was discussed and criticised by many eminent economists such as V.A. Bazarov, S.A. Pervushin and M.V. Ignatiev, and the meeting was chaired by S.A. Fal’kner. On 13 February 1926 D.I. Oparin presented his very detailed critique of Kondratiev’s analysis of long cycles, the most rigorous critique produced during NEP, and this encounter was the high-point of the debate on long cycles which occurred in the USSR in the 1920s. 1 An account of this meeting was published in book form in 1928, and Kondratiev and Oparin also published some aspects of their critical exchange in Planned Economy (Planovoe khozyaistva) in 1926. Many other theorists entered the fray against Kondratiev in this period, for example Trotsky attacked Kondratiev for arguing that the long cycle was strictly periodic in nature. 2 Finally in 1928 Kondratiev published a detailed application of long cycle analysis to the interrelation of international agricultural and industrial prices, which was in many ways the pièce de résistance of his output on long cycles, and this paper was the last which he wrote on long cycles. Thus the key years for Kondratiev long cycle publications were 1922, 1925, 1926 and 1928.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Subscribe and save.
- Get 10 units per month
- Download Article/Chapter or eBook
- 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
- Cancel anytime
- Available as PDF
- Read on any device
- Instant download
- Own it forever
- Durable hardcover edition
- Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
- Free shipping worldwide - see info
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Institutional subscriptions
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Centre for Russian and East European Studies, University of Birmingham, UK
Vincent Barnett ( Honorary Research Fellow )
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Copyright information
© 1998 Vincent Barnett
About this chapter
Barnett, V. (1998). Kondratiev, Long Cycles and Economic Conjuncture . In: Kondratiev and the Dynamics of Economic Development. Studies in Russian and East European History and Society. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26327-1_5
Download citation
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26327-1_5
Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN : 978-1-349-26329-5
Online ISBN : 978-1-349-26327-1
eBook Packages : Palgrave Economics & Finance Collection Economics and Finance (R0)
Share this chapter
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Publish with us
Policies and ethics
- Find a journal
- Track your research
An Examination of the Dynamics in the Moscow Exchange: Some Empirical Tests for Sectorial Market Efficiency
Government and Municipal Management. Scholar notes, 2018
5 Pages Posted: 20 Feb 2019
Alexakis Cristos
Esc rennes school of business, tatiana ignatova.
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration South-Russia Institute Of Management
Date Written: 2018
In the article the author argues that Moscow exchange stock market has wesk efficiency.
Keywords: Stock market, Moscow exchange, Efficiency
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Rue Robert d'arbrissel, 2 Rennes, 35000 France
Tatiana Ignatova (Contact Author)
Russian presidential academy of national economy and public administration south-russia institute of management ( email ).
Pushkinskaya 70 Rostov-na-Donu, 344002 Russia +78632407049 (Phone) +78632407049 (Fax)
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Paper statistics, related ejournals, capital markets: market efficiency ejournal.
Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic
Emerging Markets: Finance eJournal
Econometric modeling: capital markets - risk ejournal.
Information
- Author Services
Initiatives
You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Original Submission Date Received: .
- Active Journals
- Find a Journal
- Proceedings Series
- For Authors
- For Reviewers
- For Editors
- For Librarians
- For Publishers
- For Societies
- For Conference Organizers
- Open Access Policy
- Institutional Open Access Program
- Special Issues Guidelines
- Editorial Process
- Research and Publication Ethics
- Article Processing Charges
- Testimonials
- Preprints.org
- SciProfiles
- Encyclopedia
Article Menu
- Subscribe SciFeed
- Recommended Articles
- Author Biographies
- Google Scholar
- on Google Scholar
- Table of Contents
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.
Please let us know what you think of our products and services.
Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.
JSmol Viewer
Pesticide use, regulation, and policies in indian agriculture.
1. Introduction
2. objectives and methodology, 3.1. pesticide use in the world and in india, 3.2. pesticide consumption in india, 3.3. use of bio-pesticides, 3.4. use of integrated pest management (ipm).
- Agro-ecological methods: These methods emphasize the integration of natural processes and biodiversity to sustainably manage pests. They include crop rotation, polyculture, and the use of natural predators to reduce pest populations. By fostering a diverse ecosystem, beneficial insects and organisms thrive, which naturally keeps pest numbers in check. Additionally, practices such as habitat management and using pest-resistant crop varieties minimize the need for chemical pesticides, promoting environmental health and reducing the risk of pest resistance.
- Mechanical methods: These involve physical techniques and devices to manage and reduce pest populations, such as hand picking pests, using traps and barriers, and employing machinery like plows and cultivators to disrupt pest habitats. Techniques such as mulching and soil solarization can also create unfavorable conditions for pests. Mechanical control minimizes the use of chemical pesticides, thereby reducing environmental impact and health risks to humans and non-target species. These methods offer immediate and effective solutions, especially in smaller-scale or organic farming operations.
- Biological methods: These involve using living organisms to suppress pest populations through natural predation, parasitism, and competition. They include introducing or conserving beneficial insects like ladybugs and predatory beetles, which feed on pests such as aphids and caterpillars, and using parasitic wasps that lay eggs inside pest larvae. Microbial agents like Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), a bacterium that produces toxins harmful to specific insects, provide targeted pest management. Biological control methods are sustainable and environmentally friendly, reducing reliance on chemical pesticides and fostering ecological balance in agricultural systems.
- In Odisha, 100% of households adopted some type of pest control measures ( Table 4 ).
- In Haryana, Punjab, and Gujarat, about 99% of farmers implemented pest control measures.
- Andhra Pradesh had a 96% adoption rate, West Bengal 94%, and Jammu 93%.
- Conversely, Uttarakhand had only 29% adoption, Uttar Pradesh 36%, and Jharkhand 58%.
3.5. Composition of Pesticide Production in India
3.6. pesticide production, imports, exports, and consumption in india, 3.7. trade in pesticides, 3.8. market share of different pesticide categories in india, 3.9. distribution of sales and reach to consumers.
- Regions with high concentrations: Jammu and Kashmir has the highest concentration with 8.9 sales points per 1000 hectares, followed by Haryana (4.1), West Bengal (4.1), Himachal Pradesh (3.9), Punjab (3.6), and Uttar Pradesh (3.4).
- Regions with low concentrations: Bihar has the lowest concentration with 0.6 sales points per 1000 hectares, followed by Jharkhand (0.9), Kerala (0.9), Madhya Pradesh (1.1), and Rajasthan (1.2).
4. Regulation, Registration, and Quality Control
4.1. labeling of pesticide products.
- Labels must prominently feature a diamond-shaped square occupying at least one-sixteenth of the total label area.
- The upper portion of the square must contain symbols and signal words indicating toxicity levels: (i). Category I (extremely toxic): Skull and crossbones symbol and “POISON” in red, with warnings “KEEP OUT OF THE REACH OF CHILDREN” and “IF SWALLOWED, OR IF SYMPTOMS OF POISONING OCCUR, CALL PHYSICIAN IMMEDIATELY”. (ii). Category II (highly toxic): “POISON” in red and “KEEP OUT OF THE REACH OF CHILDREN”. (iii). Category III (moderately toxic): “DANGER” and “KEEP OUT OF THE REACH OF CHILDREN”. (iv). Category IV (slightly toxic): “CAUTION”.
4.2. Pesticide Residues
4.2.1. vegetables, 4.2.2. fruits, 4.2.3. spices, 4.2.4. staple crops, 4.3. ban of pesticides, decision-making criteria, 4.4. bio-pesticides, 5. policy analysis, 5.1. pfa regulations on maximum residue levels (mrls), 5.2. regulations on use of pesticides, 6. conclusions and future prospects, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.
S. No. | Crop | Major Pests | Damage (%) | Yield Loss (%) | Yield (kg/ha) | Monetary Potential (Rs/ha) | Loss Avoidance Potential (Minimum) (Rs/ha) | Loss Avoidance Potential (Maximum) (Rs/ha) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Paddy | Yellow stem borer, Scirpophaga incertulas | 10–20 | 25–30 | 2404 | 52,479 | 13,120 | 15,744 |
Brown plant hopper, Nilaparvata lugens | 40–50 | 10–70 | 2404 | 52,479 | 5248 | 36,735 | ||
Gall midge, Orseolia oryzae | 15 | 70–85 | 2404 | 52,479 | 36,735 | 44,607 | ||
Leaf folder, Cnaphalocrocis medinalis | 1–30 | 40–57 | 2404 | 52,479 | 20,992 | 29,913 | ||
2. | Cotton | Leafhopper, Amrasca devastans | 40–50 | 30–35 | 445 | 29,459 | 8838 | 10,311 |
Whitefly, Bemisia tabaci | 40 | 15–30 | 445 | 29,459 | 4419 | 8838 | ||
Tobacco caterpillar, Spodoptera litura | 30–40 | 30–40 | 445 | 29,459 | 8838 | 11,784 | ||
Pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella | 20–80 | 20–95 | 445 | 29,459 | 5892 | 27,986 | ||
Spotted and spiny bollworm, Earias vittella, E. insulana | 30–40 | 30–40 | 445 | 29,459 | 8838 | 11,784 | ||
American bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera | 20–30 | 20–80 | 445 | 29,459 | 5892 | 23,567 | ||
3. | Sugarcane | Early shoot borer, Chilo infuscatellus | Medium | 20–25 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 57,120 | 71,400 |
Pink stem borer, Sesamia inferens | 29.40 | 55–60 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 157,080 | 171,360 | ||
Top shoot borer, Scirpophaga excerptalis | Medium | 21–37 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 59,976 | 105,672 | ||
Pyrilla, Pyrilla purpusilla | Medium | 30–35 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 85,680 | 99,960 | ||
Woolly aphid, Ceratovacuna lanigera | 100 | 50–55 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 142,800 | 157,080 | ||
Internode borer, Chilo sacchariphagus indicus | 80 | 80–85 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 228,480 | 242,760 | ||
4. | Chili | Tobacco cut worm, Spodoptera litura | 2–8 | 30–40 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 245,988 | 327,984 |
Gram pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera | High | 77–75 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 631,369 | 614,970 | ||
Chili black thrips, Thrips parvispinus | high | 50–80 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 409,980 | 655,968 | ||
Whitefly, Bemisia tabaci | High | 30–40 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 245,988 | 327,984 | ||
Yellow mite, Polyphagotarsonemus latus | Medium to high | 30–50 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 245,988 | 409,980 |
S. No. | Crop | Major Pests | Damage (%) | Yield Loss (%) | Yield (kg/ha) | Monetary Potential Yield (Rs/ha) | Loss Avoidance Potential (Minimum) | Loss Avoidance Potential (Maximum) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Paddy | Blast, Pyricularia oryzae (Magnaporthe oryzae) | Low to high | 70–80 | 2404 | 52,479 | 36,735 | 41,983 |
Bacterial leaf blight, Xanthomonas oryae pv. oryzae | Low to high | 50–80 | 2404 | 52,479 | 26,240 | 41,983 | ||
Brown spot, Bipolaris oryzae | Low to high | 26–52 | 2404 | 52,479 | 13,645 | 27,289 | ||
Sheath blight, Rhizoctonia solani | Low to high | 45–55 | 2404 | 52,479 | 23,616 | 28,863 | ||
Sheath rot, Sarocladium oryzae | Low to high | 5–80 | 2404 | 52,479 | 2624 | 41,983 | ||
2. | Cotton | Leaf curl, cotton leaf curl virus | 100 | 85–95 | 445 | 29,459 | 25,040 | 27,986 |
Angular leaf spot/BLB, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. Malvacearum | 26–55 | 5–35 | 445 | 29,459 | 1473 | 10,311 | ||
Alternaria blight, Alternaria gossypina, A. alternata | 24–40 | 26.60 | 445 | 29,459 | 5892 | 8838 | ||
Myrothecium leaf spot, Myrothecium roridum | 34 | 25–60 | 445 | 29,459 | 7365 | 17,675 | ||
3. | Sugarcane | Red rot, Colletotrichum falcatum | High in sub- tropical areas | 50–100 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 142,800 | 2,85,600 |
Smut, Sporisorium scitamineum | High in sub- tropical areas | 25–50 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 71,400 | 142,800 | ||
Wilt, Fusarium sacchari | High | 15–20 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 42,840 | 57,120 | ||
Grassy shoot disease, SCGS Phytoplasma | High | 5–70 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 14,280 | 199,920 | ||
4. | Chili | Powdery mildew, Leveillula taurica | 10–20 | 14–30 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 1,14,794 | 245,988 |
Die back and fruit rot, Colletotrichum capsici | 25–47 | 10–50 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 81,996 | 409,980 | ||
Leaf curl, Begomovirus | High | 50–100 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 409,980 | 819,960 | ||
Alternaria leaf spot, Alternaria solani | High | 50–100 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 409,980 | 819,960 |
S. No. | Crop | Yield Loss Potential (%) | Yield (kg/ha) | Monetary Potential Yield (Rs/ha) | Loss Avoidance Potential (Minimum) | Loss Avoidance Potential (Maximum) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Rice | 10–100 | 2404 | 2404 | 52,479 | 5248 |
3. | Sugarcane | 25–50 | 84,000 | 84,000 | 285,600 | 71,400 |
4. | Cotton | 40–60 | 445 | 445 | 29,459 | 11,784 |
5. | Chili | 60–80 | 12,000 | 12,000 | 819,960 | 491,976 |
- Reddy, A.A.; Bhattacharya, A.; Reddy, S.V.; Ricart, S. Farmers’ distress index: An approach for an action plan to reduce vulnerability in the drylands of India. Land 2021 , 10 , 1236. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Oerke, E.C. Crop losses to pests. J. Agric. Sci. 2006 , 144 , 31–43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Dhaliwal, G.S.; Jindal, V.; Mohindru, B. Crop losses due to insect pests: Global and Indian scenario. Indian J. Entomol. 2015 , 77 , 165–168. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Karthikeyan, L.; Chawla, I.; Mishra, A.K. A review of remote sensing applications in agriculture for food security: Crop growth and yield, irrigation, and crop losses. J. Hydrol. 2020 , 586 , 124905. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Sawicka, B.; Egbuna, C. Pests of Agricultural Crops and Control Measures. In Natural Remedies for Pest, Disease and Weed Control ; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020; pp. 1–16. [ Google Scholar ]
- Kumar, V.; Khan, M.R.; Walia, R.K. Crop loss estimations due to plant-parasitic nematodes in major crops in India. Natl. Acad. Sci. Lett. 2020 , 43 , 409–412. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Nayak, P.; Solanki, H. Pesticides and Indian agriculture-are view. Int. J. Res. Granthaalayah 2021 , 9 , 250–263. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Kumar, S.; Sharma, A.K.; Rawat, S.S.; Jain, D.K.; Ghosh, S. Use of pesticides in agriculture and livestock animals and its impact on environment of India. Asian J. Environ. Sci. 2013 , 8 , 51–57. [ Google Scholar ]
- Peshin, R.; Hansra, B.S.; Nanda, R.; Singh, K.; Sharma, R.; Garg, L.; Bajiya, M.R.; Showkat, A.; Kumar, R.; Yangsdon, S. Pesticides hazardous hotspots: Empirical evidences from North India. Environ. Manag. 2020 , 66 , 899–915. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Alavanja, M.C. Introduction: Pesticides use and exposure, extensive worldwide. Rev. Environ. Health 2009 , 24 , 303–310. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Available online: https://www.fao.org/3/cc0918en/cc0918en.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2024).
- Abhilash, P.C.; Singh, N. Pesticide use and application: An Indian scenario. J. Hazard. Mater. 2009 , 165 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Devi, P.I.; Thomas, J.; Raju, R.K. Pesticide consumption in India: A spatiotemporal analysis. Agric. Econ. Res. Rev. 2017 , 30 , 163–172. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Koli, P.; Bhardwaj, N.R. Status and use of pesticides in forage crops in India. J. Pestic. Sci. 2018 , 43 , 225–232. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Shetty, P.K. Socio-ecological implications of pesticide use in India. Econ. Political Wkly. 2004 , 39 , 5261–5267. [ Google Scholar ]
- FSSAI 2019. Available online: https://fssai.gov.in/upload/advisories/2019/10/5da705b31ca78Letter_Report_Pesticides_MRL_16_10_2019.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2024).
- Agriculture Census Division. All India Report on Input Survey 2011–2012 ; Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare: New Delhi, India, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
- Agriculture Census Division. All India Report on Input Survey 2016–2017 ; Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare: New Delhi, India, 2021. [ Google Scholar ]
- Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/RP (accessed on 1 January 2024).
- Available online: https://ppqs.gov.in/sites/default/files/graphs_0.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2024).
- Available online: https://sansad.in/getFile/loksabhaquestions/annex/1710/AU1069.pdf?source=pqals (accessed on 1 March 2024).
- States/UTs Zonal Conferences on Inputs (Plant Protection) for Rabi & Kharif Seasons. Available online: https://ppqs.gov.in (accessed on 1 March 2024).
- Available online: https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/1551/1/A1968-46.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2024).
- Available online: https://upload.indiacode.nic.in/showfile?actid=AC_CEN_23_31_00001_196846_1517807318487&type=rule&filename=Insecticides%20Rule,%201971.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2024).
- Available online: https://ppqs.gov.in/divisions/central-insecticides-board-registration-committee (accessed on 1 July 2024).
- Available online: https://ppqs.gov.in/sites/default/files/pesticide_formulations_registered_for_use_in_the_country.pdf (accessed on 1 August 2024).
- Pandey, J.K. Use of Hazardous Chemical Pesticides in India: A Review. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. India Sect. B Biol. Sci. 2023 , 93 , 523–537. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Dubey, J.K.; Sharma, A. Pesticide Residues and International Regulations. In Sustainable Management of Potato Pests and Diseases ; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 353–367. [ Google Scholar ]
- Zaller, J.G.; Zaller, J.G. Where Are the Solutions to the Pesticide Problem? In Daily Poison: Pesticides-an Underestimated Danger ; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 223–295. [ Google Scholar ]
- Kuchheuser, P.; Birringer, M. Pesticide residues in food in the European Union: Analysis of notifications in the European Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed from 2002 to 2020. Food Control 2022 , 133 , 108575. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- FICCI. Ushering in the 2nd Green Revolution: Role of Crop Protection Chemicals ; Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry: New Delhi, India, 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
- Patel, P.; Naik, A. Ethical and Legal Issues in Microbial Products in India. In Agricultural Microbiology Based Entrepreneurship: Making Money from Microbes ; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2022; pp. 81–100. [ Google Scholar ]
- Birthal, P.S. Economic Potential of Biological Substitutes for Agrochemicals ; Policy Paper 18; National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research (ICAR): New Delhi, India, 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
- Narayanamoorthy, A. Profitability in crops cultivation in India: Some evidence from cost of cultivation survey data. Indian J. Agric. Econ. 2013 , 68 , 104–121. [ Google Scholar ]
- ICAR 2024. Available online: https://aicrp.icar.gov.in/pesticide/monitoring-of-pesticide-residues/ (accessed on 1 August 2024).
- Available online: https://agcensus.gov.in/AgriCensus/Agri_2122.jsp# (accessed on 1 August 2024).
- Available online: https://ppqs.gov.in/statistical-database (accessed on 20 August 2024).
- Available online: https://ppqs.gov.in/divisions/cib-rc/registered-products (accessed on 20 August 2024).
- Reddy, A.A.; Melts, I.; Mohan, G.; Rani, C.R.; Pawar, V.; Singh, V.; Choubey, M.; Vashishtha, T.; Suresh, A.; Bhattarai, M. Economic impact of organic agriculture: Evidence from a Pan-India survey. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 15057. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Kumar, R. Pesticide use in modern agriculture: Impacts on environment and human health. J. Agric. Sci. 2014 , 10 , 45–57. [ Google Scholar ]
- Patel, A.; Mehta, S. Challenges in pesticide regulation and monitoring. Environ. Policy Rev. 2018 , 12 , 120–135. [ Google Scholar ]
- Sharma, V.; Singh, A.; Gupta, R. The complexity of pesticide interactions and regulatory challenges. Pestic. Sci. Manag. 2016 , 8 , 67–78. [ Google Scholar ]
- Singh, M. Pesticide residues in Indian agriculture: An overview. Agric. Res. J. 2012 , 15 , 89–98. [ Google Scholar ]
- Gupta, R.; Sharma, V.; Singh, A. Monitoring pesticide residues in food products: A case study from India. Int. J. Food Saf. 2017 , 31 , 78–89. [ Google Scholar ]
- Kumar, A.; Singh, B. Pesticide residue analysis in food items of India. Food Saf. J. 2013 , 25 , 112–121. [ Google Scholar ]
- Mehta, S. The regulatory landscape of pesticide use in India: Challenges and prospects. J. Agric. Policy 2018 , 21 , 145–160. [ Google Scholar ]
- Patel, R. Regulation of pesticide production and use in India. J. Environ. Law 2016 , 14 , 54–67. [ Google Scholar ]
- Rao, S.; Reddy, P. Standards for pesticide residues in agricultural practices. Agric. Regul. Rev. 2014 , 18 , 102–110. [ Google Scholar ]
- Sankaran, S.; Hegde, N. Geographic and crop-specific variations in pesticide residues. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 2010 , 20 , 189–198. [ Google Scholar ]
- Sharma, V.; Kumar, R.; Patel, A. Residue levels of pesticides in Indian agricultural produce: Current scenario and future perspectives. Pestic. Res. J. 2015 , 27 , 92–105. [ Google Scholar ]
- Singh, R.; Mehta, S.; Gupta, K. Pesticide residue trends in Indian food: A comprehensive review. J. Food Qual. 2020 , 40 , 211–224. [ Google Scholar ]
- Verma, D.; Sharma, S.; Jain, R. Assessment of pesticide residues in food commodities from different regions of India. J. Environ. Monit. 2019 , 22 , 157–168. [ Google Scholar ]
- Vikas, P.; Nair, A.; Dubey, S. Recent advances in pesticide residue detection and management in India. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2021 , 25 , 135–144. [ Google Scholar ]
- Yadav, S.; Gupta, R.; Mehta, P. Evaluating pesticide residues in Indian agriculture: Policy implications and future strategies. Agric. Policy Res. J. 2018 , 19 , 121–133. [ Google Scholar ]
- Zafar, A.; Khan, N.; Sinha, P. Regulatory measures for pesticide residues in India: An analysis of current practices and recommendations. Environ. Policy Gov. 2017 , 15 , 76–85. [ Google Scholar ]
- Dasgupta, S.; Meisner, C.; Huq, M. A pinch or a pint? Evidence of pesticide overuse in Bangladesh. J. Agric. Econ. 2007 , 58 , 91–114. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Fernandez-Cornejo, J. Environmental and economic consequences of technology adoption: IPM in viticulture. Agric. Econ. 1998 , 18 , 145–155. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Kumar, S. Pesticide industry in India: Progress and potential. J. Plant Prot. Sci. 2011 , 3 , 1–13. [ Google Scholar ]
- Peshin, R.; Bandral, R.S.; Zhang, W.; Wilson, L.; Dhawan, A.K. Integrated Pest Management: A global Overview of History, Programs and Adoption. In Integrated Pest Management: Innovation-Development Process ; Peshin, R., Dhawan, A.K., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; Volume 1, pp. 1–49. [ Google Scholar ]
- Popp, J.; Pető, K.; Nagy, J. Pesticide productivity and food security. A Review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2013 , 33 , 243–255. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Pretty, J. Agricultural sustainability: Concepts, principles and evidence. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2008 , 363 , 447–465. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Reganold, J.P.; Glover, J.D.; Andrews, P.K.; Hinman, H.R. Sustainability of three apple production systems. Nature 2011 , 410 , 926–930. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Aktar, M.W.; Sengupta, D.; Chowdhury, A. Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: Their benefits and hazards. Interdiscip. Toxicol. 2009 , 2 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Bhardwaj, T.; Sharma, J.P.; Bhardwaj, A.K. Pesticide residue management in Indian agriculture: A review. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 2018 , 7 , 2547–2563. [ Google Scholar ]
- De, A.; Debnath, A.; Chowdhury, R. Pesticide applications—Contemporary trends and emerging issues. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014 , 11 , 2245–2252. [ Google Scholar ]
- Jeyaratnam, J. Acute pesticide poisoning: A major global health problem. World Health Stat. Q. 1990 , 43 , 139–144. [ Google Scholar ] [ PubMed ]
- Kumari, B.; Madan, V.K. Contamination of farmgate vegetables with pesticide residues in Haryana, India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2020 , 192 , 1–13. [ Google Scholar ]
- Nathan, H. Current status of pesticide regulations and their implementation in India. J. Regul. Sci. 2018 , 6 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ]
- Pimentel, D.; Burgess, M. Environmental and economic costs of the application of pesticides primarily in the United States. Integr. Pest Manag. 2014 , 3 , 47–71. [ Google Scholar ]
- Shetty, P.K.; Hiremath, M.B.; Murugan, M.; Rao, P. Farmers’ health issues due to pesticide exposure: Medical and economic analysis. J. Agromedicine 2017 , 22 , 118–130. [ Google Scholar ]
- Reddy, A.A. The soil health card Scheme in India: Lessons learned and challenges for replication in other developing countries. J. Nat. Resour. Policy Res. 2019 , 9 , 124–156. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Murali Baskaran, R.K.; Jain, S.K.; Sivalingam, P.N.; Mooventhan, P.; Sridhar, J.; Sharma, K.C.; Kaushal, P.; Kumar, J. National Status of Biotic Stresses of Crops ; ICAR—National Institute of Biotic Stress Management: Raipur, India, 2019; 174p. [ Google Scholar ]
- Gharde, Y.; Singh, P.K. Yield and Economic Losses Due to Weeds in India (2018) ; ICAR—Directorate of Weed Research: Jabalpur, India, 2018; 22p. [ Google Scholar ]
- Rao, A.N.; Wani, S.P.; Ladha, J.K. Weed management research in India—An analysis of the past and outlook for future. In Souvenir (1989–2014) ; DWR publication No. 18; Directorate of Weed Research: Jabalpur, India, 2014; pp. 1–26. [ Google Scholar ]
- Sharma, S.; Sharma, A.K.; Jaipaul; Bhatta, M.P. Genotypic differences in growth, yield and quality attributes of capsicumun der black polyethylene mulch. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 2011 , 81 , 413–416. [ Google Scholar ]
Click here to enlarge figure
State | TE 2007 | TE 2023 | % Change |
---|---|---|---|
Uttar Pradesh | 6980 | 11,690 | 67 |
Maharashtra | 3140 | 11,077 | 253 |
Andhra Pradesh | 1841 | 6715 | 265 |
Punjab | 6162 | 5233 | −15 |
Haryana | 4560 | 4061 | −11 |
West Bengal | 4027 | 3527 | −12 |
J&K | 758 | 2607 | 244 |
Rajasthan | 2068 | 2100 | 2 |
Karnataka | 1733 | 1941 | 12 |
Tamil Nadu | 2242 | 1879 | −16 |
Gujarat | 2757 | 1731 | −37 |
Chhattisgarh | 495 | 1718 | 247 |
Odisha | 811 | 1249 | 54 |
Bihar | 872 | 947 | 9 |
Jharkhand | 74 | 687 | 833 |
Madhya Pradesh | 831 | 648 | −22 |
Kerala | 492 | 540 | 10 |
Assam | 167 | 449 | 170 |
Himachal Pradesh | 301 | 269 | −11 |
Uttarakhand | 160 | 153 | −4 |
All India | 40,653 | 59,314 | 46 |
Land Size Category | Area Treated with Pesticides | |
---|---|---|
Irrigated Area (%) | Unirrigated Area (%) | |
Marginal (<1 ha) | 37 | 39 |
Small (1–2 ha) | 39 | 40 |
Semi-medium (2–4 ha) | 39 | 38 |
Medium (4–10 ha) | 39 | 31 |
Large (>10 ha) | 42 | 24 |
All | 39 | 36 |
State | Crops | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cotton | Onion | Pigeon Pea | Paddy | Moong | Soybean | Groundnut | Jowar | Maize | Sesame | |
Haryana | 3316 | 6960 | ||||||||
Andhra Pradesh | 6194 | 6041 | 2662 | 6053 | 7840 | 1896 | 5687 | 5593 | 413 | |
Punjab | 6753 | 5841 | 8740 | 2200 | ||||||
Telangana | 4801 | 3793 | 5248 | 1576 | 1782 | 3971 | 3500 | |||
Karnataka | 3699 | 2366 | 2427 | 2399 | 891 | 1698 | 368 | 453 | 837 | |
Madhya Pradesh | 2315 | 1944 | 1070 | 2282 | 2519 | 2236 | 667 | |||
Tamil Nadu | 3066 | 3021 | 2165 | 1349 | 813 | 169 | 2105 | |||
Kerala | 2005 | 101 | ||||||||
Chhattisgarh | 1568 | |||||||||
Himachal Pradesh | 1216 | 212 | ||||||||
Maharashtra | 4478 | 5510 | 5235 | 1158 | 873 | 3026 | 297 | 15 | 1702 | |
Gujarat | 3703 | 4237 | 2282 | 1107 | 918 | 901 | 4177 | 843 | 2010 | |
Odisha | 1905 | 3 | 1026 | 113 | 892 | |||||
Uttar Pradesh | 972 | 93 | 156 | 174 | ||||||
West Bengal | 972 | 110 | 3146 | 951 | ||||||
Bihar | 167 | 8 | ||||||||
Assam | 24 | |||||||||
Jharkhand | ||||||||||
Rajasthan | 3642 | 1115 | 422 | 2306 | 1414 | 194 | ||||
3988 | 3462 | 2496 | 2421 | 2084 | 2039 | 1634 | 1581 | 1577 | 1010 |
State | Households Adopting Pest Control Measures (%) | Chemical Control (%) | Agro-Economic and Cultural Practices (%) | Mechanical Control (%) | Biological Control (%) | Other (%) | No Efforts (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Telangana | 92 | 88 | 14 | 15 | 6 | 0 | 8 |
West Bengal | 94 | 83 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 6 |
Maharashtra | 89 | 69 | 65 | 37 | 5 | 0 | 11 |
Andhra Pradesh | 96 | 61 | 39 | 19 | 4 | 19 | 4 |
Haryana | 99 | 58 | 8 | 31 | 2 | 17 | 1 |
Himachal | 74 | 57 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 26 |
Punjab | 99 | 56 | 31 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Jammu | 93 | 53 | 25 | 7 | 8 | 27 | 7 |
Tamil Nadu | 90 | 46 | 41 | 9 | 0 | 23 | 10 |
Madhya Pradesh | 74 | 41 | 9 | 1 | 3 | 25 | 26 |
Gujarat | 99 | 30 | 83 | 26 | 1 | 10 | 1 |
Odisha | 100 | 30 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 67 | 0 |
Bihar | 79 | 29 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 45 | 21 |
Rajasthan | 75 | 28 | 62 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 25 |
Jharkhand | 58 | 28 | 21 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 42 |
Uttarakhand | 29 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 70 |
Assam | 66 | 24 | 15 | 8 | 3 | 20 | 34 |
Karnataka | 69 | 22 | 19 | 5 | 2 | 32 | 31 |
Uttar Pradesh | 36 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 12 | 64 |
Chhatisgarh | 62 | 17 | 50 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 38 |
Kerala | 25 | 3 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 75 |
India | 72 | 39 | 24 | 9 | 3 | 18 | 28 |
Year | Production | Import | Total | Consumption | Export |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2005–2006 | 82 | 19 | 101 | 40 | 91 |
2006–2007 | 85 | 28 | 113 | 42 | 108 |
2007–2008 | 80 | 29 | 109 | 44 | 96 |
2008–2009 | 85 | 18 | 104 | 44 | 185 |
2009–2010 | 82 | 22 | 104 | 42 | 126 |
2018–2019 | 217 | 117 | 333 | 60 | 461 |
2019–2020 | 192 | 107 | 298 | 62 | 452 |
2020–2021 | 255 | 157 | 412 | 62 | 533 |
2021–2022 | 298 | 134 | 432 | 63 | 648 |
2022–2023 | 258 | 134 | 392 | 52 | 630 |
Country | Insecticide | Fungicide | Herbicide | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Export | Brazil | 50,327 | 58,046 | 19,545 |
Bangladesh | 6856 | 30,272 | 0 | |
Nigeria | 4550 | 0 | 0 | |
Arab Emirates | 0 | 16,072 | 0 | |
Argentina | 0 | 0 | 7508 | |
USA | 0 | 0 | 30,589 | |
Import | China | 13,834 | 5904 | 35,314 |
Israel | 1105 | 0 | 4665 | |
Japan | 796 | 0 | 0 | |
Thailand | 0 | 1813 | 0 | |
Belgium | 0 | 1763 | 0 | |
USA | 0 | 0 | 12,922 |
Insecticide | % Share | Fungicide | % Share | Weedicide | % Share |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chlorpyriphos | 14 | Sulfur | 40 | Glyphosate | 15 |
Malathion | 7 | Mancozeb | 22 | 2,4-D Amine salt | 15 |
Quinalphos | 6 | Carbendazim | 7 | Pretilachlor | 12 |
Cypermethrin | 5 | Propineb | 3 | Butachlor | 10 |
Monocrotophos | 5 | Ziram | 3 | 2,4-D Dichlorophenoxy | 10 |
Fipronil | 5 | Copper oxychloride | 3 | Atrazine | 9 |
Profenophos | 5 | Captan | 3 | Pendimethalin | 5 |
Fenvalerate | 5 | Zineb | 2 | Isoproturon | 4 |
Acephate | 4 | Dodine | 2 | Chlodinafop-propargyl | 3 |
Dimethoate | 4 | Hexaconazole | 2 | Anilophos | 3 |
Share of top 10 | 59 | 86 | 87 |
Rodenticide | % Share | Plant Growth Regulator | % Share | Bio-Pesticide | % Share |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Zinc phosphide | 35 | Paclobutrazol | 19 | Pseudomonas fluorescens | 16 |
Aluminum phosphide | 33 | Alpha naphthyl acetic acid | 17 | Tricoderma spp. | 15 |
Methyl bromide | 13 | Validamycin | 16 | Neem-based insecticides | 12 |
Bromadiolone | 10 | Triacontanol | 15 | Metarrhizium anisopliae | 12 |
Ethylene dibromide | 4 | Chlormequat chloride | 12 | Tricoderma viride | 12 |
Barium carbonate | 1 | Gibberellic acid | 11 | Metarhizium rileyi | 11 |
EDCT mixture | 1 | Growth promoters | 9 | Beauveria bassiana | 8 |
Coumachlor | 1 | Sodium paranitro phinolate | 7 | Verticillium lecanii | 6 |
Warfarin | 0 | Azadirachin | 5 | ||
NPV (H) | 4 | ||||
Share of top 10 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Classification of the Insecticides | Medium Lethal Dose by the Oral Route Acute Toxicity LD 50 mg/kg Body Weight of Test Animals | Medium Lethal Dose by the Dermal Route Dermal Toxicity LD 50 mg/kg Body Weight of Test Animals | Color of Identification Band on the Label |
---|---|---|---|
Column-1 | Column-2 | Column-3 | Column-4 |
1. Extremely toxic | 1–50 | 1–200 | Bright red |
2. Highly toxic | 51–500 | 201–2000 | Bright yellow |
3. Moderately toxic | 501–5000 | 2001–20,000 | Bright blue |
4. Slightly toxic | More than 5000 | More than 20,000 | Bright green |
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
Share and Cite
Reddy, A.A.; Reddy, M.; Mathur, V. Pesticide Use, Regulation, and Policies in Indian Agriculture. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7839. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177839
Reddy AA, Reddy M, Mathur V. Pesticide Use, Regulation, and Policies in Indian Agriculture. Sustainability . 2024; 16(17):7839. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177839
Reddy, A. Amarender, Meghana Reddy, and Vartika Mathur. 2024. "Pesticide Use, Regulation, and Policies in Indian Agriculture" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7839. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177839
Article Metrics
Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.
Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Caniana 2, Bergamo 24127, +39.035.2052678, Italy. Abstract. The renewed interest in the market as a unit of analysis has increased adoption of a market system dynamics (MSD) per. spective. Since ...
Market system dynamics (MSD): A process-oriented review ...
Markets: market dynamics, market system dynamics, markets as social process Market formation: new market development, market creation, ... This phase of the research generated 117 papers in total. The first two authors independently scrutinized the papers to decide what articles to include in the analysis. Even when using some of our dictionary ...
DOI: 10.1177/1470593114534342. 2014 14: 269 originally published online 22 May 2014 Marketing TheoryLaszlo Sajtos and Kaj Storbacka. Suvi Nenonen, Hans Kjellberg, Jaqueline Pels, Lilliemay Cheung ...
During the last decade, a thriving and diverse subfield of marketing research, originally termed by Giesler (2003, 2008) Market system dynamics, has emerged to help answer these and other questions about markets, how they are constituted as complex social systems and how actors and institutions actively shape (and are shaped by) them, thereby challenging three problematic biases plaguing ...
will bring us naturally to the analysis of market dynamics; the main topic of the paper. Broadly speaking the goal has been to develop and apply tools that enable us to better analyze market outcomes. The common thread in the recent develop-ments is a focus on incorporating the institutional background into our emprical
To address this bias, research in the Market system dynamics tradition theorizes markets as the result of discursive negotiations among and the practices of multiple stakeholders including a market-shaping consumer (Dolbec and Fischer, 2015; Martin and Schouten, 2014; Parmentier and Fischer, 2015; Scaraboto and Fischer, 2013) but also a broader ...
will bring us naturally to the analysis of market dynamics; the main topic of the paper. Broadly speaking the goal has been to develop and apply tools that enable us to better analyze market outcomes. The common thread in the recent develop-ments is a focus on incorporating the institutional background into our empirical
Hannah Shell provided excellent research assistance. All views and opinions expressed here are the authors' and do not necessarily reflect those of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis or the Federal Reserve System.Search for more papers by this author
evealed several key findings regarding the dynamics of financial markets. These findings include an analysis of the factors influencing financial markets, s. ch as macroeconomic indicators ...
This study examines the influence of monetary policy on stock market performance and activity in Bangladesh, focusing on the Dhaka Stock Exchange (DSEX) index, using monthly data from August 2012 to June 2024. The regression analyses incorporate key monetary variables: the 91-day treasury bill rate, broad money supply, and Consumer Price Index (CPI). The first model reveals that the current ...
A method proposed by Roeger is used to estimate monopoly and monopsony market power, relaxing the assumptions of perfect competition and constant returns to scale, and avoiding any endogeneity issues. The results obtained indicate that foreign investments and consolidation have a positive and significant impact on food processors' and ...
Abstract. Market deregulation of agricultural commodities requires in-depth analysis of day-to-day transactions. The analysis helps to draw greater insights into the market dynamics and builds better policies and advisory system for the farming sector. Reformation to the agricultural commodity market impel to deregulation of market transactions ...
Retail Financial Innovation and Stock Market Dynamics: The Case of Target Date Funds. NBER Working Paper No. w28028. 61 Pages Posted: 2 Nov 2020 Last revised: 30 Jan 2023. ... S&P Global Market Intelligence Research Paper Series. Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic FOLLOWERS. 2,583. PAPERS. 41,438. Capital ...
We build a dataset of harmonized rotating panel labor force surveys covering 42 countries across a wide range of development and document three new empirical findings on labor market dynamics. First, labor market flows (job-finding rates, employment exit rates, and job-to-job transition rates) are 2-3 times higher in the poorest as compared to the richest countries. Second, employment ...
Purpose: This research provides a brief review which explores theories and concepts in International Business (IB) and management, covering global market dynamics, factors influencing foreign ...
Hence, this research paper investigates whether herding towards the market exists in Moscow stock exchange. Apart from that the authors also test the association between herd behaviour towards the market and a group of factors pertaining to calendar events, liquidity, information environment and oil price fluctuations.
Jennejohn, Matthew, The Transactional Dynamics of Market Fragility (April 19, 2022). 85 Law and Contemporary Problems (2022 Forthcoming), BYU Law Research Paper No. 22-11, Available at SSRN: ... Brigham Young University J. Reuben Clark Law School Research Paper Series. Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic ...
Kondratiev first mentioned the idea of long cycles in print in the mono-graph The World Economy and its Conjuncture During and After the War (Mirovoe khozyaistvo i ego kon"yunktury vo vremya i posle voiny) published in 1922, and an account of this pioneering presentation is given below. Kondratiev's first paper devoted specifically to long cycles was published in Questions of Conjuncture ...
Abstract and Figures. We present a novel approach to the study the dynamics of stock market correlations. This is achieved through an innovative visualization tool that allows an investigation of ...
Keywords: Stock market, Moscow exchange, Efficiency Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation Cristos, Alexakis and Ignatova, Tatiana, An Examination of the Dynamics in the Moscow Exchange: Some Empirical Tests for Sectorial Market Efficiency (2018).
This research paper presents a comprehensive analysis of pesticide use in global and Indian agriculture, focusing on the mounting food security challenges due to population growth and the increased demand for food and fiber crops. While pesticides are crucial in mitigating losses due to pests, diseases, and weeds, increasing apprehension regarding their adverse effects on human and environment ...