The Economics of Atrazine

References

• Coursey D. Illinois Without Atrazine: Who Pays? Chicago, IL: Harris School of Public Policy, University of Chicago, 2007. !http://www.illb.org/uploads/files/atrazine_final_report_02-27-07_13072.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Weed killer deforms frogs in sex organs, study finds. New York Times, April 17, 2002, p A19.
   Google Scholar
• Swan SH, Kruse RL, Liu F., et al Overstreet and Study for FutureFamilies Research Group. Semen quality in relation to biomarkers of pesticide exposure. Environ Health Perspect. 2003; 111: 1478–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pimentel D. Environmental and economic costs of the applica-tion of pesticides primarily in the United States. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2005; 7: 229–52.
   Google Scholar
• Ackerman F, Heinzerling L. Priceless: On Knowing the Price of Everything and the Value of Nothing. New York: The New Press, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes TB. There is no denying this: defusing the confusion about atrazine. BioScience. 2004;54 (12): 1138–1149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sass JB, Colangelo A. European Union bans atrazine, while the United States negotiates continued use. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2006; 12: 260–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribaudo MO, Bouzaher A. Atrazine: Environmental Character-istics and Economics of Management. USDA, Agricultural Eco-nomic Report. 1994; 699.
   Google Scholar
• Ribaudo M. Economic and environmental effects associated with reducing the use of atrazine: an example of cross-discipli-nary research. J Agricultural and Applied Economics. 1997; 29: 87–97.
   Google Scholar
• Lakshminarayan PG, Bouzaher A, Shogren JF. Atrazine and water quality: an evaluation of alternative policy options. J Envi-ron Manage. 1996; 48: 111–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Assessment of Potential Mitigation Measures for Atrazine. Biological and Economic Analysis Division, EPA, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Lin W, Westcott PC, Skinner R, Sanford S, De La Torre Ugarte DG. Supply Response under the 1996 Farm Act and Implica-tions for the U.S. Field Crops Sector, Economic Research Ser-vice, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett RS. Two Decades of Atrazine Yield Benefits Research. Triazine Network, 2006. !http://www.ksgrains.com/triazine/.
   Google Scholar
• Swinton SM, Lybecker DW, King RP. The effect of local triazine restriction policies on recommended weed management in corn. Review of Agricultural Economics. 1995; 17: 351–67.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticide Fact Sheet Mesotrione, June 4, 2001. http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/factsheets/mesotrione.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• http://www.syngenta.com/en/products_services/callisto_page.aspx.
   Google Scholar
• Armel GR, Wilson HP, Richardson RJ, Hines TE. Mesotrione, acetochlor, and atrazine for weed management in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technology. 2003; 17: 284–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armel GR, Wilson HP, Richardson RJ, Hines TE. Mesotrione combinations in no-till corn (Zea mays). Weed Technology. 2003; 17: 111–6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson BC, Young BG, Matthews JL. Effect of postemergence application rate and timing of mesotrione on corn (Zea mays) Response and Weed Control. Weed Technology. 2002; 16: 414–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephenson DO IV, Bond JA, Walker ER, Bararpour MT, OliverLR. Evaluation of mesotrione in Mississippi Delta corn produc-tion. Weed Technology. 2004; 18: 1111–6.
   Google Scholar
• European Council. Council Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980 relating to the quality of water intended for human con-sumption. Official Journal of the European Union. 1980; L229: 11-29.
   Google Scholar
• European Council. Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption. Official Journal of the European Union. 1998;L330: 32-54.
   Google Scholar
• European Council. Council Directive of 15 July 1991 concern-ing the placing of plant protection products on the market, 91/414/EEC. Official Journal of the European Communities. 1991;L230: 1-40.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Plants on specific questions from the Commission concerning the evaluation of atrazine in the context of council directive 91/414/EEC. Brussels, Belgium: Health and Consumer Protec-tion Directorate-General, Scientific Committee on Plants. SCP/ATRAZINE/002-Final, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. Commission Decision of 10 March 2004 concerning the non-inclusion of atrazine in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing this active substance, 2004/248/EC. Official Journal of the European Union. 2004;L78: 53-5.
   Google Scholar
• Giupponi C. The Substitution of Hazardous Molecules in Pro-duction Processes: The Atrazine Case Study in Italian Agricul-ture. Milan, Italy: Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Tagliabue J. In rice fields of Italy, the waters are troubled. NewYork Times. April 14, 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Swanson T, Vighi M (eds). Regulating Chemical Accumulation in the Environment. Cambridge, U.K: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Chynoweth E. Atrazine gets reprieve from European Commis-sion. Chemical Week, London, U.K., July 22, 1992.
   Google Scholar