School of Public Health (Shenzhen), Sun Yat-sen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518107, China.
Quantitative Sustainability Assessment, Department of Technology, Management and Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, 2800, Kgs, Lyngby, Denmark.
J Environ Manage. 2022 Jan 1;301:113909. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113909. Epub 2021 Oct 6.
To promote international collaboration on environmental pollution management and human health protection, we conducted a global-level study on the management of pesticides for surface freshwater quality. Prior to actions being taken in terms of water treatment or remediation, it is essential that clear and definite regulations be disseminated. In our study, 3094 surface freshwater quality standards for 184 different pesticides were recorded from 53 countries and categorized according to pesticide types and standard types, as well as diverse use of freshwater by humans, and compared water quality standards related to human health. Our results indicate large variations in pesticide regulations, standard types (i.e., long- or short-term water quality standards), and related numerical values. With regard to the protection of human health, the 10 most frequently regulated pesticides account for approximately 47% of the total number of standards across 184 considered pesticides. The average occurrence-weighted variations of standard values (i.e., numerical values provided in a standard in terms of residue limits of a given pesticide in water) for the 20 most regulated persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and other phase-out pesticides (i.e., pesticides not currently-approved for use in agriculture across various countries) are 4.1 and 2.6 orders of magnitude, respectively, with human-exposure related standard values for some pesticides varying with over 3 orders of magnitude (e.g., lindane). In addition, variations in water quality standard values occurred across standard types (e.g., maximum and average), water use types (e.g., unspecified waters and human consumption), and standard values (e.g., pesticide individuals and groups). We conclude that regulatory inconsistencies emphasize the need for international collaboration on domestic water treatment, environmental management as well as specific water quality standards for the wider range of current-use pesticides, thereby improving global harmonization in support of protecting human health.
为了促进环境污染管理和人类健康保护方面的国际合作，我们对地表水水质的农药管理进行了全球层面的研究。在采取水处理或补救措施之前，必须明确和明确地传播规定。在我们的研究中，从 53 个国家记录了 184 种不同农药的 3094 种地表水质量标准，并根据农药类型和标准类型以及人类对淡水的不同用途进行了分类，并比较了与人类健康相关的水质标准。我们的研究结果表明，农药法规、标准类型（即长期或短期水质标准）以及相关数值存在很大差异。就保护人类健康而言，10 种最常被监管的农药约占所考虑的 184 种农药中总标准数的 47%。20 种受监管的持久性有机污染物（POPs）和其他逐步淘汰的农药（即目前各国农业禁用的农药）的标准值的平均加权变化分别为 4.1 和 2.6 个数量级，一些农药的人类接触相关标准值变化超过 3 个数量级（例如，林丹）。此外，水质标准值在标准类型（例如，最大和平均）、用水类型（例如，未指定用水和人类消费）和标准值（例如，农药个体和群体）之间存在差异。我们得出结论，监管不一致强调需要在国内水处理、环境管理以及更广泛的当前使用农药的特定水质标准方面开展国际合作，从而支持保护人类健康的全球协调一致。
