Pesticide use in agriculture (aei_pestuse)

National Reference Metadata in ESS Standard for Quality Reports Structure (ESQRS)

Compiling agency: Chemicals Regulation Division, Health and Safety Executive


Eurostat metadata
Reference metadata
1. Contact
2. Statistical presentation
3. Statistical processing
4. Quality management
5. Relevance
6. Accuracy and reliability
7. Timeliness and punctuality
8. Coherence and comparability
9. Accessibility and clarity
10. Cost and Burden
11. Confidentiality
12. Comment
Related Metadata
Annexes (including footnotes)
 



For any question on data and metadata, please contact: EUROPEAN STATISTICAL DATA SUPPORT

Download


1. Contact Top
1.1. Contact organisation

Chemicals Regulation Division, Health and Safety Executive

1.2. Contact organisation unit

Plant Protection Products Operational Policy Team

1.5. Contact mail address

Ground floor Mallard House, Kings Pool, 3 Peasholme Green, York YO1 7PX


2. Statistical presentation Top
2.1. Data description

See sub-categories below.

2.1.1. Main characteristics of statistics

The samples are drawn from the Defra June Survey return (an obligation on the part of farmers to submit data on their annual cropping) so as to represent the area of all arable crops grown throughout England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. For England the samples are selected within each of the eight Government Office Regions (GORs), the Welsh Assembly Government provide a further sample, which represent the area grown in Wales, and for Scotland the country is divided into 11 land-use regions (Wood, 1931). The programme includes biennial surveys of arable, soft fruit, orchards, vegetables and edible protected crops and a four yearly survey of grassland & fodder crops. Arable crops account for 90% of all usage in terms of area treated and weight applied. The survey is primarily by visit although emailed responses from farm management software, posted records and telephone responses are now more commonplace. For each survey all crops grown on a farm are included. In most cases full field level data is obtained from each farm (marked as s "single"). However, in a minority of cases sample fields for each crop/variety combination are taken and data from these fields are marked differently (m, "multiple") to those where we have complete data.  Calculations which look at the percentage of pesticides used on each crop and the number of pesticide applications applied to a crop are calculated using the s, "single", data.

2.1.2. Reference period of data collection

2017 and 2018 harvest periods.

2.1.3. National legislation
No
2.1.3.1. Name of national legislation

Not applicable

2.1.3.2. Link to national legislation

Not applicable

2.1.3.3. Responsible organisation for national legislation

Not applicable

2.1.3.4. Year of entry into force of national legislation

Not applicable

2.1.3.5. Coverage of variables required under EU regulation

Not applicable

2.1.3.6. Divergence national definitions from EU regulation

Not applicable

2.1.3.7. Legal obligation for respondents
No
2.1.4. Additional comments data description

Not applicable

2.2. Classification system

The classification used for pesticides corresponds to Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1185/2009 (http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1185/2017-03-09) of the European Parliament and of the Council.
The classification system for crops derives from the Annual crop statistics Handbook 2019 (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/Annexes/apro_cp_esms_an1.pdf).

2.3. Coverage - sector

Six separate commodity sectors:  Grassland & fodder crops 2017; Outdoor vegetable crops 2017; Edible protected crops 2017; Arable crops 2018;  Orchard crops 2018; Soft fruit/Small fruit crops 2018.

2.3.1. Crops covered by the statistics

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

2.3.2. Commercial non-agricultural uses of pesticides

Amenity survey every four years; Aerial application responses annually

2.4. Statistical concepts and definitions

The data reported are the quantity of each active substances listed in Annex III of Regulation 1185/2009 contained in plant protection products used on a selected crop, expressed in kg. The area treated with each substance are expressed in hectares.

2.5. Statistical unit

Agricultural holding or holding means a single unit, both technically and economically, which has a single manage-ment and which undertakes agricultural activities listed in Annex I within the economic territory of the EuropeanUnion, either as its primary or secondary activity (all categories in Annex 1 are included);  These holdings are identified by Defra using a CPH number (county/parish/holding number).

2.6. Statistical population

Individual samples are selected for each of the 6 commodity groups.  The minimum holding size varies from 0.01 hectares (edible protected crops); 0.1 hectare (outdoor vegetable crops); 0.4 hectares (soft fruit crops) to 1 hectare (arable,  grassland & fodder crops and orchards).  Sample size varies by survey - 600 holdings arable crops; 450 holdings grassland & fodder crops; 2,000 holdings grassland (postal survey); 440 holdings outdoor vegetables; 210 holdings edible protected crops; 200 holdings orchards; 200 holdings soft fruit.

2.7. Reference area

See sub-categories below.

2.7.1. Geographical area covered

The entire territory of the country.

2.7.2. Inclusion of special territories

The entire territory of the country. United Kingdom excluding Channel Islands; Scilly Islands; Isle of Man and all terriotries included in the guidelines for this concept.

2.8. Coverage - Time

2013 onwards

2.9. Base period

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics, because it is not based on an index number of time series.


3. Statistical processing Top
3.1. Source data

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

3.2. Frequency of data collection

Arable crops, Soft Fruit and Orchards data are collected on alternate even years - 2014, 2016, 2018 etc.  Edible protected crops and outdoor vegetables are collected on alternate odd years - 2015, 2017, 2019 etc.  Grassland and fodder crops every 4 years 2013, 2017 etc.

3.3. Data collection

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

3.4. Data validation

Basic CSV checks - ensuring that data within the database meets the rules set for each database and that database fields holding crop stage and methods of application join to lookup tables; Spray round consistency - All constituents of a spray round (tank mix) have the same date, method of application & crop stage); Continuity - ensures that all tables that require to join - do join;  Area treated > area grown - this cannot happen; Crop sowing dates - ensure that spring crops have spring dates of sowing and winter crops have winter dates of sowing; Mixed units - ensure that ac fields have rates per acre and that ha fields have rates per hectare; Product mismatches - ensures that data in the survey table joins to the product database on product, crop, method of application and crop stage; Crop stage validations - ensure that crop stages such as pre-harvest and pre-emergence agree with the dates of application; Seed treatment areas - these have to add up to the area grown; Seed variety proportions - these have to add up to 100; High and low rates - check to ensure that rates are not too high (>1) or too low (<0.1) when compared to prooduct label rates; Approval status - Ensures each application is checked against the approved product, crop, method of application and crop stage combination. If not the records are checked, the grower is contacted in some cases. If it is a definite non-approved use this is recorded in the database; Reasons for use - use to create another column which standardises the data collected without changing the original data; Failed crops - ensure that data recorded for failed crops is identified as n FC crop stage; Timing of applications - checks to ensure that timing of use is logical for each crop/product combination - e.g. fungicides not used before a crop is drilled (unless used as an in furrow application).

3.4.1. Data validation measures
Manual
3.4.2. Target of data validation measures
Completeness
Outliers
Aggregates
Consistency
Data flagging
Other
3.4.3. Specification target of data validation

Basic CSV checks - ensuring that data within the database meets the rules set for each database and that database fields holding crop stage and methods of application join to lookup tables; Spray round consistency - All constituents of a spray round (tank mix) have the same date, method of application & crop stage);  Continuity - ensures that all tables that require to join - do join; Area treated > area grown - this cannot happen; Crop sowing dates - ensure that Spring crops have spring dates of sowing and winter crops have winter dates of sowing; Mixed units - ensure that ac fields have rates per acre and that ha fields have rates per hectare; Product mismatches - ensures that data in the survey table joins to the product database on product, crop, method of application and crop stage; Crop stage validations - ensure that crop stages such as pre-harvest and pre-emergence agree with the dates of application; Seed treatment areas - these have to add up to the area grown; Seed variety proportions - these have to add up to 100; High and low rates - check to ensure that rates are not too high (>1) or too low (<0.1) when compared to product label rates; Approval status - Ensures each application is checked against the approved product, crop, method of application and crop stage combination. If not the records are checked, the grower is contacted in some cases. If it is a definite non-approved use this is recorded in the database;  Reasons for use - use to create another column which standardises the data collected without changing the original data; Failed crops - ensure that data recorded for failed crops is identified as n FC crop stage; Timing of applications - checks to ensure that timing of use is logical for each crop/product combination - e.g. fungicides not used before a crop is drilled (unless used as an in furrow application).

3.5. Data compilation

Whilst we use the Defra June Statistics and the Basic Horticultural Statisitics for the UK in order to make estimates we do not always feel that these are always correct and on occasion we can make better estimates from the data we are collecting. In many cases we are collecting data from between 30% to 50% of the total area of horticultural crops grown which gives us a good feel for what is actually being grown. For arable crops we sample 6% of the total area grown but we are confident of the Defra June survey data for this and the grassland & fodder surveys. Details on the sample percentage is included in each of the published reports. The methodology for making national estimates can be found in the following Eurostat publication https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/guide.pdf We use three main raising factors to estimate national usage from the samples. RF1 which raises sampled data in each size group and region to the census area in each size group and region; RF2 which raises the sampled area of each crop in each region * RF1 to the regional census area of each crop; RF3 is the final correction factor which raises the sampled areas * RF1 * RF2  to the national cropping area.

3.6. Adjustment

Other than the use of raising factors outlined in 3.5 above, there are no other adjustments made.


4. Quality management Top
4.1. Quality assurance

See sub-categories below.

4.1.1. Quality management system in organisation
Yes
4.1.2. Specification of implementation

https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/qualityAssurance.pdf

4.1.3. Peer review
Yes
4.1.4. Main conclusions peer review

Most comments from reviewers are incorporated into the published reports: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/index.cfm

4.1.5. Future quality improvements
Other
4.1.6. Specification of quality improvements
Improve data validation
Further automation
Further training
Peer review
These are all aspects that are continually improved following the data collection for each survey.
4.1.7. Additional comments quality assurance

Continual improvements in data collection, particularly using non-visit survey methodologies, telephone, email, post; data validation improvements in response to electronic data; data manipulation improvements using farmer/grower software.  Alll of this is ongoing.

4.2. Quality management - assessment

https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/qualityAssurance.pdf

4.2.1. Overall quality
Improvement
4.2.2. Relevance
Stable
4.2.3. Accuracy and reliability
Improvement
4.2.4. Timeliness and punctuality
Stable
4.2.5. Comparability
Improvement
4.2.6. Coherence
Improvement
4.2.7. Additional comments quality assessment

Use of MySQL through Aqua Data Studio and a new PUS database has meant that error checking, validations, updates, data requests and comparability across databases has all improved since the 2015 submission.


5. Relevance Top
5.1. Relevance - User Needs

The data are used for a number of purposes including: Informing the pesticide risk assessment (authorisation) process; Policy, including assessing the economic and/or environmental implications of the introduction of new active substances and the withdrawal/non-authorisation of pesticide products (the data reported to organisations such as the FAO, WHO and EU enabling the UK to honour international agreements); evaluating changes in growing methods and Integrated Pest Management where this has an impact on pesticide usage; Informing the targeting of monitoring programmes for residues in food and the environment; Contributing to assessing the impact of pesticide use, principally as part of the Pesticides Forum’s Annual Report; Quantifying pesticide usage and changes in the use of active substances over time; Responding to enquiries (for example, Parliamentary Questions, correspondence, queries under the Freedom of Information Act or Environmental Information Regulations, etc.).

5.1.1. Unmet user needs

Have had requests for rodenticide and hardy ornamental plant propagation data but these surveys are no longer conducted.  There have also been some requests where, because of the time involved and the fact that a payment was required, have not gone ahead.

5.1.2. Plans for satisfying unfilled user needs

There are no plans to reinstate these surveys. Payments are required on any request in excess of 2 hours. Below 2 hours all request are free.

5.1.3. Additional comments user needs

Not applicable

5.2. Relevance - User Satisfaction

We feel that all requests for data have gone ahead succesfully. Any subsequent clarifications following a data request have been answered. All requests have met the deadline of those making the request.

5.2.1. User satisfaction survey
Yes
5.2.2. Year of user satisfaction survey

2009

5.2.3. Satisfaction level
Satisfied
5.2.4. Additional comments user satisfaction

The user satisfaction survey was a formal consultation.

5.3. Completeness

See sub-category below.

5.3.1. Data completeness - rate

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics because in this data collection, there is no target on the number of data. Member States are asked to collect data on representative crops without stipulating the number of crops.


6. Accuracy and reliability Top

-

6.1. Accuracy - overall

All published reports for agricultural and horticultural crops contain a statistical report and estimate of RSE for area treated and weight applied: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/index.cfm

6.1.1. Grading of accuracy
High
6.1.2. Factors lowering accuracy
Other
6.1.3. Specification of factors
Sampling error - for some horticultural surveys the quality of the Defra June Survey data can be poor. This results in difficulties in achieving the sample required and in making estimates of national usage.
Coverage error - this doesn’t seem to be an issue for horticultural surveys (20%+ of the area is sampled) - may be more of an issue for arable crops and grassland & fodder where we are sampling less than 10% of the area grown.
6.1.4. Additional comments overall accuracy
Not applicable
6.2. Sampling error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

6.3. Non-sampling error

See sub-categories below.

6.3.1. Coverage error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

6.3.2. Measurement error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

6.3.3. Non response error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

6.3.4. Processing error

See the attached Excel file in the Annexes.

6.3.5. Model assumption error

This report presents a comprehensive summary of data for outdoor vegetable crops grown and taken to harvest in 2019. We will provide information on any revisions we make to the report or the datasets if any inaccuracies or errors occur. Details of any revisions, including the date upon which they were changed, will appear on the following website: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/index.cfm

6.4. Seasonal adjustment

Seasonal adjustment is not applicable to pesticide use statistics since all plant protection treatments associated directly or indirectly with the crop during the reference period are reported.

6.5. Data revision - policy

This report presents a comprehensive summary of data for outdoor vegetable crops grown and taken to harvest in 2019.  We will provide information on any revisions we make to the report or the datasets if any inaccuracies or errors occur.  Details of any revisions, including the date upon which they were changed, will appear on the following website: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/index.cfm

6.6. Data revision - practice

Thankfully data revisions are quite rare, mainly because of the use of MySQL and ADS for error checking. They do happen and the last data revision posted was for the 2014 surveys: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/2014surveys.cfm  However, in 2016 it was necessary to re-write the whole arable report because of an error associated with the Defra June Survey data: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/2016surveys.cfm

6.6.1. Data revision - average size

Two data revisions have been done

6.6.2. Data revisions - conceptual changes
No
6.6.3. Reason for revisions

New or improved data

6.6.4. Impact of revisions
Very important
6.6.5. Additional comments data revisions

Not applicable


7. Timeliness and punctuality Top
7.1. Timeliness

See sub-categories below.

7.1.1. Time lag - first result

For most recently published survey: https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/2019surveys.cfm

Data collection would have started in October 2019 and the first draft was circulated to reviewers on 04.11.2020

7.1.2. Time lag - final result

The outdoor vegetable report was published 08 December 2020

7.1.3. Reasons for possible long production times?

For the production of the 2019 outdoor vegetable report delays have been caused because of Covid 19 where most people have been working from home. However, the reporting process regularly takes a long time, approximately 10 - 11 months on average. This is because of 1) the length of time involved in collecting the data 2) the length of time taken to either load or key in the sample data into the database (over 300000 rows of data in the 2018 arable survey) 3) error checks and data validations 4) calculation of raising factors and national estimates 5) incorporating reviewers' comments.

7.2. Punctuality

See sub-categories below.

7.2.1. Punctuality - delivery and publication

Agreed with HSE (CRD) at the start of the year. Managed delivery times if issues arise.

7.2.2. Data release according to schedule
YES
7.2.3. Data release on target date
YES
7.2.4. Reasons for delays

Not applicable


8. Coherence and comparability Top
8.1. Comparability - geographical

Government Office Region (NUTS 1) data are collected and the samples are based on the regional areas of each commodity grown. Therefore there is good comparibility between regions. However, certain regions regularly have much larger samples than others because of the extensive areas of crops grown in these regions. For most surveys sample sizes are adequate to make regional comparisons. However, for regions such as the North East, the North West and the country of Wales the areas grown are often small with consequentially small sample sizes. When Relative Standard Errors are calculated these regions and size groups with these regions (and others depending on the survey) are often amalgamated.

8.1.1. Asymmetry for mirror flow statistics - coefficient

Not applicable, because there are no mirror flows in Pesticide Use Statistics.

8.2. Comparability - over time

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics, because it is not based on time series.

8.2.1. Length of comparable time series

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics, because it is not based on time series.

8.3. Coherence - cross domain

These comparisons are not made

8.4. Coherence - sub annual and annual statistics

Not applicable for Pesticide Use Statistics, because the data collection is based on a five-year period.

8.5. Coherence - National Accounts

Not applicable, because it has no relevance for national accounts.

8.6. Coherence - internal

All data are based on records collected from farmers and growers. The same methodology (sampling, form design, data collection and making national estimates) has been in operation since 1965 and we are able to compare field level data from 1987 onwards and summary data from 1965.


9. Accessibility and clarity Top
9.1. Dissemination format - News release

Not applicable

9.1.1. Publication of news releases
No
9.1.2. Link to news releases

Not applicable

9.2. Dissemination format - Publications

Published at https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/index.cfm

9.2.1. Production of paper publication
No
9.2.2. English paper publication
No
9.2.3. Production of electronic publication
Yes
9.2.4. English electronic publication
Yes
9.2.5. Link to publications

Publications are available here

9.3. Dissemination format - online database

Available at https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/index.cfm

9.3.1. Data tables - consultations

9.3.2. Accessibility of on-line database
Yes
9.3.3. Link to on-line database

The datatbase is avaialble here.

9.4. Dissemination format - microdata access

Bespoke requests are answered. Since April of this year there have been 16 requests from Government (61.75 hours); 20 requests from outside Government (19 hours); 4 simple email requests (1hour); and 2 pieces of collaborative work. We ensure confidentiality by ensuring that we don't display data for less than 5 occurences and ensure that we dont identify any regional/crop combinations that would identify growers. To do this we using crop groupings.

9.4.1. Accessibility of micro-data
No
9.4.2. Link to micro-data

Not applicable

9.5. Dissemination format - other

https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/supporting/pub/en-846

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/epp.12210

https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/guide.pdf

9.6. Documentation on methodology

https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/supporting/pub/en-846

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/epp.12210

https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/guide.pdf

9.6.1. Availability of national reference metadata
No
9.6.2. Link to national reference metadata

Not applicable

9.6.3. Availability of methodological papers
Yes
9.6.4. Link to methodological papers

https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/guide.pdf

https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/pesticideAnalysis.pdf

9.6.5. Availability of handbook
Yes
9.6.6. Link to handbook

https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/guide.pdf

9.7. Quality management - documentation

https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/pusstats/surveys/documents/qualityAssurance.pdf

9.7.1. Metadata completeness - rate

We have included all six major of the major surveys in this report (see Annex). There are additional minor surveys of aerial applications, potato storage and amenity usage that we conduct but I think that these are outside the remit of this report.

9.7.2. Metadata - consultations

Either two or three peer reviews per year depending on the number of surveys conducted.

9.7.3. Availability of quality report
YES
9.7.4. Link to quality report

It is available here


10. Cost and Burden Top

HSE contracts the work out to Fera Science Ltd, under a long term service agreement (LTSA). The last financial year cost around £350,000.00.

For burden on respondents: arable, £1,221; orchards, 2,611; soft fruit, £2,944; edible protected crops, £2,609; outdoor vegetable crops, £5,764, grassland & fodder approximately £6,000.  The published reports show the extent of non-visit methodologies used. The use of electronic records is increasing and for the current survey programme (during Covid) all data will be collected by email, telephone and post. We give farmers and growers a choice of whether they want to participate and the most convenient way for them to participate in the survey. In recent years we have incentivised farmers and growers by providing continuing professional development (CPD) points for BASIS and NRoSO. Where possible we avoid contacting respondents every year. Where possible respondents are excluded from the subsequent years' surveys.

10.1. Efficiency gains
On-line surveys
Further automation
Increased use of administrative data
Further training
Other
10.2. Specification efficiency gains

Greater use of farm management software and use of Aqua Data Studio MySQL

10.3. Measures to reduce burden
Less respondents
More user-friendly questionnaires
Easier data transmission
10.4. Specification burden reduction

Greater use of farm management software.


11. Confidentiality Top
11.1. Confidentiality - policy

We ensure confidentiality by ensuring that we don't display data for less than 5 occurrences and ensure that we don't identify any regional/crop combinations that would identify growers. To do this we using crop groupings to disguise crops within a region.

11.1.1. Transmission of confidential national data to Eurostat
Yes
11.1.2. Confidentiality according to Regulation
Yes
11.1.3. Data confidentiality policy

The data include information about individual holdings and occupiers. They are collected with a guarantee of confidentiality under the Agricultural Statistics Act 1979 and/or Fair Processing Notice in place at the time the data were collected. The data are also covered by the requirements of Codes of Practice for statistics. The data may only be used for the purpose they are collected. Access to the data is limited and will not be copied in whole or in part to any other person or body. All those who have access must abide by the confidentiality requirements. Material will only be published in such a way that no information relating to any particular land, business or person can be inferred from it i.e. statistical tables must not show information relating to fewer than five farm holdings in any cell, or of tables from which such information can be deduced. Narrative statements must not include information about an individual farm holding whether directly identifiable or not. Maps and graphic information for publication must not allow identification of any single holding, or information relating to a single holding or to small groups of fewer than five holdings. Where information from different data sources is brought together; increased risks of identification of individual holdings must be properly managed and mitigated.

The Pesticide Usage Data (PUS data) are owned and published under licence (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/). Fera is not responsible or liable for any use of the PUS data and does not warrant the accuracy or fitness for purpose of the Data. Fera services are based on the availability of the PUS data under licence. Fera is not responsible or liable should changes to the PUS data licence prevent the provision of these services in the future.

11.2. Confidentiality - data treatment

We ensure confidentiality by ensuring that we don't display data for less than 5 occurences and ensure that we dont identify any regional/crop combinations that would identify growers. To do this we using crop groupings to disguise crops within a region.

11.2.1. Procedures for confidentiality

We ensure confidentiality by ensuring that we don't display data for less than 5 occurences and ensure that we dont identify any regional/crop combinations that would identify growers. To do this we using crop groupings to disguise crops within a region.

11.2.2. Additional comments confidentiality - data treatment

We use the number of occurences per county to determine whether data should be displayed or not. However, there is normally a restriction on not providing data below a NUTS1 level. In order to do this we ask HSE (CRD) for permission and ensure that the regional population is large and that crops are grouped with other crops to prevent the identification of individuals. All microdata are provided by staff experienced in the collection of PUS data and have a knowledge of the crops grown by specialist growers. The ideal lowest level of data dissemination is region and crop group.


12. Comment Top

Whilst we use the Defra June Statistics and the Basic Horticultural Statistics for the UK in order to make estimates, they are for a year before the data. These may not always be correct; we can often make better estimates from the data we are collecting. In many cases we are collecting data from between 30% to 50% of the total area of horticultural crops grown which gives us a good feel for what is actually being grown. For arable crops we sample 6% of the total area grown. Details on the sample percentage for each commodity group are included in each of the published reports.


Related metadata Top


Annexes Top
UK_annex_Quality_report_pesticide_usage_second_ref_period