Science calls for ambitious European pesticide policies
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is a clear scientific consensus that pesticides threaten biodiversity worldwide.
“there is a clear scientific consensus that pesticides threaten biodiversity worldwide ( 112 -115 )”
From Environmental impacts of genetically modified crops (2024) · cites this paper as [113]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 9 · Cited by 34
- Authors
- Candel, J., Pe’er, G., & Finger, R.
- Affiliations
- Wageningen University & Research (NL)
- Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (DE)
- ETH Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Candel, Jeroen
- Finger, Robert
- Venue
- Nature Food
- Published
- 2023-03-31
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 272-272
- ISSN
- 2662-1355 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4362467906
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 3
- FWCI
- 4.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.wur.nl
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Food (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agricultural Economics and Policy
- Keywords
- pesticide policy, pesticide reduction, European Union, agricultural policy, food security, feed security, pesticide exposure, agrivoltaics, political economy of agriculture
- MeSH terms
- Pesticides, Policy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review