Department of Engineering Management, Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Paris-Saclay Applied Economics, Palaiseau, France.
PLoS One. 2023 Mar 16;18(3):e0283131. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283131. eCollection 2023.
In 2023, the European Union will vote on the reauthorization of glyphosate use, renewed in 2017 despite concern on impacts on the environment and public health. A ban is supported by several Member States but rejected by most farmers. What are citizens' preferences to phase out glyphosate? To assess whether taxation could be an alternative to a ban, we conducted a discrete choice experiment in five European countries. Our results reveal that the general public is strongly willing to pay for a reduction in glyphosate use. However, while 75.5% of respondents stated to support a ban in the pre-experimental survey, experimental results reveal that in 73.35% of cases, earmarked taxation schemes are preferred when they lead to a strong reduction in glyphosate use for an increase in food price lower than that induced by a ban. When glyphosate reduction is balanced against its costs, a tax may be preferred.
2023 年，欧盟将就批准继续使用草甘膦进行投票，尽管人们对其对环境和公共健康的影响表示担忧，但草甘膦已于 2017 年获得续期。一些成员国支持禁用，但大多数农民反对。那么，民众对于逐步淘汰草甘膦有何偏好呢？为了评估征税是否可以替代禁用，我们在五个欧洲国家进行了离散选择实验。结果表明，公众强烈愿意为减少草甘膦的使用而付费。然而，尽管 75.5%的受访者在实验前的调查中表示支持禁用，但实验结果显示，在 73.35%的情况下，如果有针对性的税收计划能够大幅减少草甘膦的使用，同时使食品价格的上涨低于禁用所导致的上涨，那么这些计划将更受欢迎。当草甘膦的减少与其成本相平衡时，税收可能会更受青睐。
