Economic assessment of alternatives for glyphosate application in arable farming

Abstract

Application and sales of herbicides with glyphosate have strongly increased in Germany during the past 10 years. This has raised a number of questions and discussions concerning glyphosate use. Therefore, this paper identifies and evaluates alternatives with an efficacy almost equivalent to glyphosate for different treatmentareas in terms of economic consequences for farms in comparison to glyphosate use by way of example. With the help of exemplary crop rotations uses in arable farming for winter wheat, winter oilseed rape, winter barley, maize and summer barley were analyzed. Within a “worst case scenario” a complete abandonment of glyphosate applications was assumed. Different tillage systems (plough, no-plough) were considered. The only alternatives with an efficacy almost equivalent to glyphosate were mechanical measures. For the analyzed treatment-areas (desiccation, pre-sowing, stubble) no approved and efficient chemical alternative could be identified. The economic advantages and disadvantages of substituting glyphosate by mechanical alternatives were strongly depending on the treatment-area, the efficacy concerning yield expectations (in comparison to glyphosate use), the tillage system, the necessity of grain drying as well as further operational factors such as the availability of sufficient field work days and mechanical equipment.

Keywords

• benefits
• chemical and non-chemical alternatives
• costs
• mechanical weed control