ABSTRACT:
Weed control is a crucial aspect in many conservation agriculture systems given that costs and time savings from avoiding tillage are closely linked to the use of effective and environmental friendly herbicides. This has led to the widespread use of glyphosate in farms, as it is a broad-spectrum, easily degradable, low- cost herbicide. The recent debate on the safety of glyphosate and on the excessive use of chemical herbicides in food production has caused concern on farmers about the possible economic effects of a virtual ban on glyphosate. The aim of this paper is to estimate the costs associated with an eventual prohibition of glyphosate in Spanish conservation agriculture areas. The costs of different alternative weed control strategies for herbaceous and tree crops were calculated: i) substitution of glyphosate in chemical control; ii) minimum tillage; iii) conventional tillage; and iv) natural or planted vegetal groundcovers. The results show that banning glyphosate would increase the costs of chemical control by 40% for herbaceous and by 57% for tree crops. However, conventional tillage would be a cheaper option for herbaceous because costs increase by 10% compared to current techniques. Our estimations suggest that the ban on glyphosate would have a negative impact on the economic profitability of farms and also on other non-economic advantages derived from conservation farming techniques.
Keywords:
conservation systems; conventional tillage; economic evaluation; weed control