Farmers'
¿
interpretation
of pesticide pictograms
In C am eroon, labels on containers
of pesticides for cotton pest control
do not indicate the product toxicity
o r instructions for use.
Pesticide labels could be improved
with simple illustrations. H ow effective
are the FAO pictograms which
were designed to facilitate
the comprehension of these labels
by smallholders w orldw ide?
O R S T O M ( I n s t it u t f r a n ç a is de re c h e r c h e s c i e n t i f i q u e p o u r le d é v e l o p p e m e n t en c o o p é ra tio n ) c o n d u c te d a survey to assess smallholders' understanding of the FAO p ic tograms. The results revealed many incorrect interpretations w h ic h c o u ld lead to dange rous situations, indicating that the pictogram symbols are not universally understandable.
The survey was c a rrie d o u t in 1992 in the region surrounding the Institut de recherche agronomique (IRA) at Maroua (Cameroon). A ra n d o m s am ple was taken o f 203 p eo ple, i n c l u d i n g e ig h t w o m e n , f r o m 20 e t h n i c g ro up s. T h e ir ages ranged fro m 22 to 46. Most of those surveyed were illiterate (76%)', and the others had generally spent only 2 or 3 years at primary school. Most o f them were rural people (87% were farmers). The discus sions were in Fulani, the dom inant language of the region.
The researcher c o n d u c tin g the survey sho w ed each respondent a series o f 13 p ic t o grams designed by the Food and Agriculture O rg a n iz a tio n o f the U nited N atio ns (FAO), one by one, and asked "If you saw these dra w ings on a bottle o f insecticide for treating cotton, w ha t might they mean?"
A broad range
of interpretations
In T able 1, all interpretatio ns o b ta in e d for each p ictog ra m are classified a c c o rd in g to their accuracy:
- n o t u n d e r s to o d : th e p ic t o g ra m was n ot interpreted at all;
- correct: the pictogram was correctly inter preted;
- p a r t i a l : th e m essa ge w a s n o t e n t i r e l y understood;
- incorrect: the message was poorly unders tood.
Taking a lack of understanding of 10% as the pictogram elim in atio n threshold, only p icto grams 3, 4, 7 and 8 are suitable for use. The analysis must be taken a step further. It is important to be w ary of correct replies as the reasoning behind them can be incorrect. For instance, there was a high percentage of cor r e c t r e p li e s f o r p i c t o g r a m 7 ( 8 3 % ) , i.e . "glasses should be w o r n " , but many o f the interpretations were dubious, such as:"so as not to have the sun in one's eyes during treat m e n t" , " t o be able to c le a r ly see th e pest insects, contents o f the bottle, the plants to be t r e a t e d " , and e ven " t o l o o k g o o d d u r in g treatment". H. TOURNEUX CNRS-ORSTOM, 3 5 1 4 0 Saint-Hibire- des-Landes France
safety
Table 1. Pictograms: definitions, percentage o f replies for 2 0 3 respondents. The pictogram was considered unsuitable when the lack o f understanding was greater than 10 %.
Pictogram
Not Understood
1 0
H ow to handle
the concentrated liquid
H ow to handle the d ry concentrate H ow to a p p ly the product
4
W e a r gloves 5 W e a r breathing apparatus W e a r a protective mask covering the nose and mouth7 W e a r protective glasses
8 W e a r boots
9 W a sh after using pesticides
Keep under lock and key, out o f the reach o f children
1 1 D anger
1 2 Dangerous, harm ful to anim als
Dangerous, harm ful to fish.
1 3
A v o id contam inating lakes, rivers, ponds o r w a te r courses 17 14 1.5 28 24 2 0 .5 5 4 .5 4 3 17.5 26Correct
4 .5 0 .5 6 4 8 9 .5 0 28 83 81 5 8 .5 3 9 3 9 .5 58 11Partial
71 5 5 0 55 4 0 .5 14 15.5 0 0 0 4 6 .5Incorrect
7 .5 3 0 .5 3 0 .5 4 .5 17 7 .5 0 1.5 16 6 .5 17.5 2 4 .5 16.5safety
References
T O U R N E U X H., 1 9 9 3 . S m a ll h o ld e r understanding of phyto- sanltary picto g ra m s in North Cameroon. Coton et fib r e s t r o p i c a l e s , 48 (1): 41-56. Food and A g r i c u l tu r a l O r g a n iz a t io n o f t h e U n i t e d N a t io n s , 1 9 8 5 . P ic to g r a m s f o r p e s tic id e s la b e ls . For safe pesticide handling. Supplement to the FAO r e c o m m e n d a t io n s fo r g o o d p e s t ic id e la b e l ling. Rome, Italy, FAO.There were many correct answers for some of the pictograms (e.g. n°s 9, 12 and 13), but the interpretations were so incorrect and dange rous that they w o u ld have to be ruled out. 1.5% of the replies for pictogram 9 suggested that "d irty water can be disinfected w ith the product". There were also alarming interpre tations for p ictogram 1 2 , such as using the pesticide to "fatten, heal or vaccinate cattle and chickens" (1 7.5%), and even to " k ill their parasites" (2 %).
In fact, there was a multitude of incorrect and dangerous replies for all o f the pictograms, such as:
- "the product should be poured into a glass and drunk" (pictogram 1 : 2.5%);
- "the product can be used for fishing" or "to feed fish" (pictogram 13: 8%);
- "the product should be poured onto seeds" (pictogram 2: 4%);
- "keep the p ro du ct on the w in d o w ledge" (pictogram 1 0 : 1 %).
Interpretations were sometimes partly correct b u t c o n t a in e d a c la u s e m e a n in g th a t th e recommendation w o u ld not be fo llo w ed up. For instance, "after treatment, wash your face w it h ta p w a t e r " ( p ic t o g r a m 9). Since ta p w a te r is n o t g e n e r a lly a v a ila b le and w e l l w a t e r is used, th e re is a risk th a t fa rm e rs (having registered the idea o f "ta p w ater") w ill not wash after treatment.
W h ile the skull and crossbones depicted in p ic tog ra m 11 is a clear w a r n in g o f serious
danger for Westerners, many rather surprising interpretations were obtained in the survey: - m a n y r e s p o n d e n t s d id n o t u n d e r s ta n d (43%);
- " d r i n k i n g th is p r o d u c t m akes y o u sad" (4%);
- "a scarf should be tied over the mouth so as not to in h a le the p r o d u c t " and "c o v e r the mouth and nose" (3%)
- " y o u s h o u ld lau gh a fte r d e s t r o y in g th e insects" (1 %);
- " i f you touch the product, evil spirits w ill attack y ou" (1 %).
A cultural problem
Pictograms should be used as m em ory-jo g- gers to recall in fo rm a tio n already p rovided elsewhere. They cannot replace the essential need fo r agricultural supervisors to instruct farmers as to safe ways of utilizing chemical pesticides.
The results o f the present survey highlight the fact that no pictograms are c o m p le te ly u n i versal. Designers should produce pictograms th a t d if fe r a c c o r d in g to g e o c u ltu ra l zones rather than aim ing at universal applications. Pictograms such as the skull and crossbones (n° 1 1 ) to sign ify serious danger and a tap (n° 9) fo r w a t e r are n o t at all s u ita b le fo r sub-Saharan Africa.
Abstract... Resumen... Résumé
H. TOURNEUX - Farmers' interpretation of pesticide
pictograms.
A survey was carried out in the Cam eroon cotton belt on farm e rs' understanding of FAO pictograms tha t illustrate s a fe ty m e asu res to be ta k e n in th e use of pesticides. O f th e th ir te e n dra w in gs proposed to s u p p le m e n t the pesticide labels, fou r ap pe ared to be suitable since their m e a n in g w as un d e rsto o d in o v e r 9 0 % o f rep lie s. All others led to dangerous or erroneous interpretations. Key words: pesticides, hygiene, health, Cameroon.
H. TOURNEUX - La interpretación campesina de los
pictogramas fitosanitarios.
En la zo na algodonera de Camerún, se ha llevado a cabo un a encuesta sobre la m a n e r a en que los agricultores c o m p r e n d e n los p ic to g ra m a s de la FAO destin ad o s a ilustrar las medidas de seguridad que se deben to m a r al u t i l i z a r p r o d u c to s p e s tic id a s . D e los tr e c e d ib u jo s propuestos pa ra com pletar las etiquetas de los productos químicos, cuatro parecen convenientes, pues la tasa de c o m p r e n s ió n d e su m e n s a je s u p e r a el 9 0 % d e las r e s p u e s t a s . Los d e m á s i n d u c e n i n t e r p r e t a c i o n e s peligrosas o erróneas.
P alabras clave : productos fitosanitarios, higiene, salud, C amerún.
H. TOURNEUX - L'interprétation paysanne des
pictogrammes phytosanitaires.
Dans la zo ne cotonnière du C am eroun , une en qu ête a porté sur la m a n ière dont les agriculteurs com prennent les p ic to g r a m m e s de la FAO, de stinés à illu s tre r les mesures de sécurité à prendre en utilisant des produits pesticides. Sur les 1 3 dessins proposés pour compléter les é tiq u e tte s des p ro d u its c h im iq u e s, q u a t r e p a raiss en t c o n v e n a b le s , car le t a u x d e c o m p r é h e n s io n d e le u r m essage dépasse 9 0 % des réponses. Tous les autres induisent des interprétations dangereuses ou erronées. M ots-clés : p ro d u its p h y to s a n ita ir e s , h y g iè n e , santé, C ameroun.
