Food, pesticides, and public perception: What’s behind the label?

What do you really know about the pesticides on your food? For many consumers, the answer is not much. Ask Katie Dentzman, a rural sociologist at Iowa State University, who is examining neonicotinoid use in potato production and what it means for agriculture, regulation, and the environment.

Neonicotinoids – commonly referred to as “neonics” – are a class of insecticides chemically related to nicotine. The insecticide is widely used in U.S. agriculture to manage pests in crops and has been linked to the decline of bee populations.

Dentzman, an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, specializes in the intersection of agriculture, sustainability, and public policy. Here, she studies how people – consumers, farmers, and policymakers – comprehend the use of neonics in agriculture, specifically in potato production.

The initiative started in fall 2023 and is led by entomologist Sophia Zendri at Michigan State University. It brings together a multi-institutional team of researchers from across the country, including Cornell University, Washington State University, Colorado State University, University of Wisconsin – Madison, University of Maine, and the USDA Agricultural Research Service. Potatoes USA, an industry group, is the project’s main industry partner.

Expertise ranges from entomologists, plant and soil scientists, and extension educators to rural sociologists. Dentzman values this interdisciplinary approach.

“Managing pesticide use requires input from many fields because the challenges are so interconnected,” she said.

Neonicotinoids are heavily regulated or partially banned in the European Union and some Canadian provinces. Yet, in the United States, regulation has been driven by large food retailers, rather than federal or state mandates.

“Walmart, for example, has stated they are intending on banning neonicotinoid use in the potatoes they purchase,” said Dentzman. “They have argued that consumers are concerned about bee health, their own health, and how the insecticide might be impacting them. What’s unclear is whether those consumer concerns are actually real or simply assumed.”

The challenge of honest responses

Dentzman is conducting a national consumer survey using Prolific, a research platform. The website helps researchers collect data from a sample of participants to reflect the demographics of the U.S. population.

The survey asks participants if they are familiar with neonicotinoids, how concerned they are about pesticide exposure, and whether they would be willing to pay more for neonicotinoid-free potatoes.

One major challenge, Dentzman explains, is overcoming “social desirability bias,” the tendency for people to give answers they believe are more socially acceptable, rather than truthful.

“There are biases in how surveys are answered because people want to sound good,” Dentzman said. “Would you buy these pesticide-free potatoes to help your family stay healthy? Everyone is going to say yes, right?”

Toxic or tolerable?

Dentzman and her collaborators are also studying how growers will adapt if neonicotinoids are restricted.

“If this is banned or regulated, what are farmers’ other options?” she said. “The question that people don’t seem to be addressing is what fills the gap. If this insecticide goes away, what do they use as an alternative?”

Dentzman explains that some alternatives might be more toxic in the short term, more expensive, or labor-intensive. While neonics have very low toxicity in the short term, the concern is what happens if exposed to chronic low levels.

This concern builds on her past research into glyphosate (commonly known by the brand name Roundup), a widely used herbicide that has faced public criticism.

“In some cases, farmers responded to herbicide resistance by resorting to older, more toxic chemicals,” Dentzman said. “Others had to rely on costly manual labor to weed their fields. They’d rather not do that – they see glyphosate as a safer, more feasible option and want to preserve it.”

She added that farmers are highly reflective about the pesticides they use and the challenges they face, balancing effectiveness, cost, labor, and environmental impact.

Dentzman’s work encompasses the complexities of agricultural decision-making and how broader systems influence it. She emphasizes that pesticides are not just an individual choice made by farmers but are influenced by input suppliers, policy, labor availability, and community norms.

Looking forward

To address the neonics question, Dentzman and the research team are holding focus groups with potato farmers to understand their perspectives on neonicotinoids, possible regulatory changes, and what forms of support they would need to adapt. Long-term, the team hopes their work can impact future policy.

“There’s a great example from Cornell University, where researchers wrote a comprehensive report on neonicotinoid use that directly informed New York State’s regulatory approach,” said Dentzman. “We’re aiming to do something similar for the Midwest, Northeast, and Northwest –major potato-growing regions.”

Ultimately, Dentzman sees the solution as a collaborative, systems-based approach.

“It’s not about being pro- or anti-pesticide,” she said. “It’s about understanding the real-world trade-offs and helping people make informed decisions.”