Issues in Risk/Benefit Evaluation for Pesticide Registration

Curtis R. Taylor

Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics1992https://doi.org/10.1017/s0899367x00002567article
ABDC C
Weight
0.40

What the paper says

The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and its amendments and related legislation currently require that applicants for registration or reregistration of a pesticide demonstrate to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that there is not “any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, taking into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of use of the pesticide.” Present benefit evaluation guidelines call for consideration of effects on users, nonusers, consumers, GNP, and employment. Minimum guidelines call for a partial budgeting analysis and, if output effects of eliminating the pesticide appear large, a more sophisticated analysis using neoclassical multimarket economic-surplus concepts.

2 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/s0899367x00002567

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{curtis1992,
  title        = {{Issues in Risk/Benefit Evaluation for Pesticide Registration}},
  author       = {Curtis R. Taylor},
  journal      = {Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics},
  year         = {1992},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/s0899367x00002567},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Issues in Risk/Benefit Evaluation for Pesticide Registration

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.40

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.36 × 0.4 = 0.14
M · momentum0.20 × 0.15 = 0.03
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.