Latent Class Model.

In 2023, the European Union will vote on the reauthorization of glyphosate use, renewed in 2017 despite concern on impacts on the environment and public health. A ban is supported by several Member States but rejected by most farmers. What are citizens’ preferences to phase out glyphosate? To assess whether taxation could be an alternative to a ban, we conducted a discrete choice experiment in five European countries. Our results reveal that the general public is strongly willing to pay for a reduction in glyphosate use. However, while 75.5% of respondents stated to support a ban in the pre-experimental survey, experimental results reveal that in 73.35% of cases, earmarked taxation schemes are preferred when they lead to a strong reduction in glyphosate use for an increase in food price lower than that induced by a ban. When glyphosate reduction is balanced against its costs, a tax may be preferred.2023年，欧盟将对草甘膦（glyphosate）的使用授权续展进行投票表决。该授权曾于2017年完成续展，但当时就已引发其对环境与公众健康造成不利影响的担忧。部分欧盟成员国支持禁用草甘膦，但多数农民对此持反对态度。为探明民众对逐步淘汰草甘膦的偏好，并评估征税能否作为禁用草甘膦的替代方案，我们在五个欧洲国家开展了离散选择实验（discrete choice experiment）。研究结果显示，普通公众普遍愿意为减少草甘膦使用量承担相应经济成本。不过，尽管有75.5%的受访者在实验前的调查中表示支持禁用草甘膦，但实验结果表明：当指定用途税收（earmarked taxation）方案能够大幅削减草甘膦使用量，且带来的食品价格涨幅低于禁用方案时，73.35%的场景下民众会更偏好该税收方案。当草甘膦使用量削减的收益与其实施成本进行权衡时，征税方案或许会成为更优选择。