ABSTRACT
The literature on the risk perceptions, knowledge levels, and attitudes of operators, workers, and residents in relation to non-dietary exposure to agricultural pesticides is reviewed. No literature was identified in relation to bystander exposure. Research has primarily been conducted on participants in developing countries and migrant workers in the United States. For operators and workers, illiteracy, poverty, and a perception that exposure to pesticides is an inevitable part of their work results in limited adoption of safety precautions while using and storing pesticides. As a result, risk communication activities aimed at operator and workers need to take account of the wider socioeconomic and cultural conditions in which workers and operators are working and living. There is less research focused on residents’ and bystanders’ perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. The lack of European data in general, and residents’ and bystanders’ data in particular, represents a knowledge gap that is pertinent to emerging EU legislation requiring residents’ and bystanders’ inclusion in pesticide risk assessment. This review provides a comprehensive overview that can assist policy-makers, and risk communicators in the development of targeted training and awareness-raising material for operators, workers, bystanders, and residents. Areas for future research are suggested.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge funding under the BROWSE FP7 project (Bystanders, Residents, Operators and WorkerS Exposure models for plant protection products. Seventh Framework Programme, Theme: Environment [including climate change] Project Number: 265307; http://www.browseproject.eu).
Notes
Consumption of food and water contaminated with pesticide residues can represent a significant route for exposure, and have been extensively addressed in the existing risk perception literature. However, these data are excluded from this review unless exposure occurs as part of daily working practices, or through residents’ or bystanders’ exposure. The ecological impacts of pesticide use are also out of the scope. For the same reason, risk perceptions associated with the domestic use of pesticides are also excluded.
The studies reviewed in this article are not following the official definition of workers as developed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Instead, the term workers often refers to people performing operator and re-entry tasks, whereas a “worker” in the EFSA (Citation2010) definition is defined as a person who, as part of his/her employment, enters an area that has previously been treated with pesticides or who handles a crop that has been treated with pesticides.