Vol. 51—1997 - NorthEastern Weed Science Society

22
THE NATIONAL FIELD CORN HERBICIDE
ASSESSMENT MODEL:
RATIONALE AND APPLICATIONS
THE NORTHEAST REGION
BENEFIT
IN
L. P. Gianessi and M. B. Marcelli'
ABSTRACT
Considerable issatisfactionexists with currently-usedmethodsof estimatingthe aggregatebenefitsof
pesticideuse. ypically,aggregatebenefitsestimatesrely only on expertopinionof likelyyieldlosses if a
currently-use pesticideis withdrawnor banned. Suchestimatesare poorly documented,non-replicable,
difficultto m . y, divergent,and prejudicial, Somepossiblesolutionsto this probleminclude: 1)EPA's
proposed com arative product performancetestingrequirements.or 2) the eliminationof benefits
calculationse tirely. Another solutionis the developmentof biologicand economicmodels and
databases that would enable policymakersand regulatorsto calculatequicklyand more accuratelythe
impacts on yi Ids and costs of a potentialregulationor policy.
The National enter for Food and AgriculturalPolicy (NCFAP) has begun a project to assemblethe
databases and computer routines necessary to estimate the aggregatecosts of pesticideregulatory
policies. The CFAP project is based on a benefitsmethodologydevelopedat the Universityof Georgia.
The system in grates State-specificdatabasesdelineatingpest infestations,the potentialyield losses of
uncontrolled ts, and the control efficaciesof chemicaland non-chemicalalternatives.
Alternativest currently-usedpesticidesare comparedbased on efficacyof controllingpests and product
and applicati costs. The model calculatesand comparesthe aggregatecosts and pest controlbenefits
of each altern tive. The model is easily modifiedto expandthe set of availablealternativesto include
experimental ompoundsand non-chemicalcontrols. The databaseis updatedregularlywith new prices
and products. The results are for currentlyavailablealternatives.
NCFAP has sembledstate-by-statedatabasesdelineatingweedspeciesinfestationsin field com (Zea
mays). These infestationestimates are based on a surveyof extensionserviceweed scientists,who also
provided esti ates of potentialcom yield losses if the weed specieswere uncontrolled. NCFAP has
computerized all of the weed control ratingsfor field com herbicidesas publishedin twenty-eight1996
state extensio service recommendationsreports.
odel has been used to calculatethe yield and herbicideexpenditurechangeslikely to result
if atrazine we unavailablefor field com use in the Northeast. Theseimpacts are directlytraceableto
differencesin effectivenessof control of importantweed speciesand averageprices of herbicide
alternatives. e model's estimates of yield impactsfor northeasternstateshave been comparedto
expert opinio yield loss estimatesprovidedin the past by universityweed scientists.
1 Senior Rese ch Associateand ResearchAssociate,NationalCenterfor Food and AgriculturalPolicy,
1616 P Stre NW, First Floor, Washington,DC 20036