Background of the study; Methodology and data sources; Wheat in the Agricultural Economy of Bangladesh; Financial prices and economical prices; Profitability measures; Efficiency measures; Sensitivity analysis; Conclusions and policy implications; Appendix 1: data collection activities; Appendix 2: supplementary tables.

"In a recent survey of 820 Boro (winter rice), potato, bean, eggplant, cabbage, sugarcane, and mango farmers in Bangladesh, over 47 percent of farmers were found to be overusing pesticides. With only 4 percent of farmers formally trained in pesticide use or handling, and over 87 percent openly admitting to using little or no protective measures while applying pesticides, overuse is potentially a threatening problem to farmer health as well as the environment. To model pesticide overuse, the authors used a 3-equation, trivariate probit framework, with health effects and misperception of pesticide risk as endogenous dummy variables. Health effects (the first equation) were found to be strictly a function of the amount of pesticides used in production, while misperception of pesticide risk (the second equation) was determined by health impairments from pesticides and the toxicity of chemicals used. Pesticide overuse (the third equation) was significantly determined by variation in income, farm ownership, the toxicity of chemicals used, crop composition, and geographical location. The results highlight the necessity for policymakers to design effective and targeted outreach programs that deal specifically with pesticide risk, safe handling, and averting behavior. Ideally, the approach would be participatory in nature to address key informational gaps, as well as increasing a farmers' awareness retention. The results also point to specific crops and locations experiencing a higher prevalence of overuse-bean and eggplant in general-and overall production in the districts of Chapainawabganj, Chittagong, Comilla, Jessore, Narshingdi, Rajshahi, and Rangpur. Focusing efforts in these crop and geographical areas may have the most measurable effects on pesticide overuse. "--World Bank web site.

"As pesticide traders are important sources of information about the health impacts of pesticides, a crucial understanding of their perception is necessary to guide further pesticide information dissemination efforts through this channel. To this end, a 2003 survey of 110 Bangladeshi pesticide traders was conducted with questions on the pesticides in stock, knowledge and training in pesticide use and handling, sources of information, protective measures, and health effects. A two-equation bivariate probit model was initially estimated for health impairment and trader perception with health effects as an endogenous regressor in the perception equation. Results indicate that pesticide toxicity, exposure in terms of number of years spent in the pesticide business, trader's age (experience), and the interaction between the most harmful pesticides and training received in pesticide use and handling were the significant determinants of health impairment status. Risk perception was determined by actual health impairment status, pesticide toxicity, the average number of hours spent in the shop per day, training, and the interaction term between highly toxic substances and training. The evidence suggests that the current information content may not be effective, and thus training programs should be revised with a greater emphasis on health hazards and averting behavior. "--World Bank web site.

"Concerns about the sustainability of conventional agriculture have prompted widespread introduction of integrated pest management (IPM), an ecologically-based approach to control of harmful insects and weeds. IPM is intended to reduce ecological and health damage from chemical pesticides by using natural parasites and predators to control pest populations. Since chemical pesticides are expensive for poor farmers, IPM offers the prospect of lower production costs and higher profitability. However, adoption of IPM may reduce profitability if it also lowers overall productivity, or induces more intensive use of other production factors. On the other hand, IPM may actually promote more productive farming by encouraging more skillful use of available resources. Data scarcity has hindered a full accounting of IPM's impact on profitability, health, and local ecosystems.