Summary
This interdisciplinary literature review synthesises evidence on pesticide health effects and economic valuation approaches across the period 2000–2013, identifying a key gap: occupational health research focuses on directly exposed populations (farmers), whilst economic preference studies concentrate on indirect consumer exposure. The authors highlight unresolved tensions in benefit-cost analysis of pesticide regulation, particularly regarding the role of risk perception and the need for integration across health, economics, and policy disciplines.
Regional applicability
The review covers international evidence and is broadly applicable to United Kingdom pesticide policy and regulation. However, the paper does not distinguish country-specific regulatory contexts or UK-particular health burden estimates, so application to UK practice would require supplementary analysis of UK-specific occupational exposure data and consumer preferences.
Key measures
Health outcomes from pesticide exposure (occupational and consumer); preference valuations for pesticide risk reduction; cost-benefit ratios in regulatory scenarios.
Outcomes reported
The study reviewed evidence on pesticide health effects in occupationally exposed populations (farmers) and consumer risk perception literature (2000–2013), and synthesised economic valuation methods and benefit-cost analysis frameworks for pesticide regulation.
Topic tags
Dig deeper with Pulse AI.
Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.