| 1. Title: Paying the price: pesticide subsidies in developing countries. Author: Repetto R Source: Washington, D.C., World Resources Institute [WRI], 1985 Dec. [5], 33 p. (Research Report No. 2) Abstract: Examination is made of the unsuccessful efforts in balancing gains and risks of governments to subsidize pesticide sales to encourage their use in developing countries. Case studies of 9 countries exemplify the findings: Indonesia, Senegal, Ghana, Egypt, Colombia, Honduras, Ecuador, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China. Subsidies are provided through access to foreign exchange on favorable terms, through tax exemptions or reduced rates, through easy credit, and through sale-below-cost by government controlled distributors. Estimates of subsidies for the sample of 9 countries range from 15-20% of total retail cost to 80-90%. The medium level was 44%. The consequence of subsidies other than cheap cost is over use, less use of integrated pest management, inequalities between large and small farmers in receipt of subsidies, and lost government revenue. Pakistan is the only country which has systematically examined the advisability of subsidies for pesticides; this resulted in discontinuation of subsidies in 1980. Although international agencies such as the World Bank warn against over use of pesticides, they do not provide guidelines on subsidies. The US Agency for International Development's policy to provide free pesticides should stipulate that countries subsidizing pesticides are ineligible. Important policy issues are at stake. The findings show that pesticides are widespread and substantial. The direct budgetary outlays and revenue losses of subsidies range from US $4.70/year in Egypt to US $3.00/year in Honduras per capita; the median is US $1.70/year. The example of Indonesia puts subsidies in perspective; US $0.80/capita for pesticide subsidies vs. US $1.50/capita for housing land water supply and US $2.50/capita for health improvement. The effects on government budgets are fully examined as well as the effects on farmers' decisions. Details are also provided on the distribution of benefits and the costs of pesticide subsidies. Language: English Keywords: DEVELOPING COUNTRIES | INDONESIA | CHINA | PAKISTAN | GHANA | SENEGAL | EGYPT | HONDURAS | ECUADOR | COLOMBIA | SUMMARY REPORT | AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT | ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION | SOIL DEGRADATION | INEQUALITIES | FOREIGN AID | DEVELOPMENT POLICY | COST EFFECTIVENESS | INCENTIVES | GOVERNMENT FINANCING | INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION | AGRICULTURAL WORKERS | INGREDIENTS AND CHEMICALS | Asia, Southeastern | Asia | Asia, Eastern | Asia, Southern | Africa, Western | Africa, Sub Saharan | Africa | Africa, North | Central America | Latin America | Americas | South America, Western | South America | South America, Northern | Rural Development | Economic Factors | Environmental Degradation | Environment | Socioeconomic Factors | Financial Activities | Policy | Evaluation Indexes | Quantitative Evaluation | Evaluation | Labor Force | Human Resources Document Number: 075980 |
 |
||
 |
Information & Knowledge for Optimal Health (INFO) Project 111 Market Place Suite 310, Baltimore, MD 21202 Phone: 410-659-6300 Fax: 410-659-6266 Security & Privacy Policy |  |