An-Najah National University 

Faculty of Graduate Studies 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Knowledge of Safe use of Agricultural 

Pesticide and Application of Safety Measures 

by Farmers in Tulkarm Governorate 
 

 

 

 

 

 

By 

Shaher Ahmed Hassan Al Sous 
 

 

 

 

 

Supervisor 

Dr. Abdel Fattah Al Mallah 
 

Co-Supervisor 

Dr. Tawfiq Qubbaj 
 

 
 

This Thesis is Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the 

Requirements for the Degree of ‎Master of Environmental 

Sciences, Faculty of Graduate Studies, An-Najah ‎National 

University, Nablus, Palestine. 

2021 



ii 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 
Knowledge of Safe use of Agricultural Pesticide 

and Application of Safety Measures by Farmers 

in Tulkarm Governorate 
 

 

By 

Shaher Ahmed Hassan Al Sous 
 

 

This thesis was Defended Successfully on 16/02/2021 and approved by: 

Defense Committee Members  Signature 

1- 1- Dr. Abdel Fattah Al Mallah / Supervisor ………..……… 

2- 2- Dr. Tawfiq Qubbaj / Co-Supervisor ………..……… 

3- Dr. Abdullah Al-Omari / External Examiner             ………..……… 

4- Dr. Hafez Shaheen / Internal Examiner             ………..……… 



iii 
 

 
 

Dedication 

This work is dedicated to 

 

My father soul, 

 

A woman of great strength and love  

(my mother), 

 

Whose support, encouragement, and love made this work possible  

(My wife and my sons), 

 

My brothers and sisters and every one of my relatives, 

 

Supervisors of this thesis, 

 

My university "An-Najah National University" which is continuously 

improving the research. 

 

and  

All researchers who are working to improve the 

quality of life. 

  



iv 
 

 
 

Acknowledgment 

I would like to express my gratitude to those, without whom my thesis 

would have been impossible, improbable and/or impoverished. Special 

thanks to An-Najah National University for offering this opportunity for 

me to study in the field of environmental science. 

I would like to convey my warm thanks to my supervisors Dr. Abdelftah 

AL Mallah and Dr. Twfeeq Qubaj for their initiating and planning of this 

work, providing me with their experiences and for their continuous support, 

encouragement, guidance and kind supervision that lead to the achievement 

of this work in its current form. 

My sincere thanks to my colleagues in the department of environmental 

science at the Faculty of Graduate Studies of An-Najah National University 

for their support and encouragement. 

Deep thanks to my mother, my wife, my children, and my brothers and 

sisters for their patience, understanding, and support without whom, I 

would have never been able to accomplish this thesis. 

Finally, I am very grateful to those who participated and helped me to 

complete this study. 

  



v 
 

 
 

 ا٣قشاس

 أنا السؽقع أدناه، مقجم الخسالة التي تحسل العشؽان:

 االستخدام اآلمن لممبيدات الزراعية وتطبيقمدى المعرفة ب
 ماجراءات الدالمة لدى المز 

 

Knowledge of Safe use of Agricultural Pesticide 

and Application of Safety Measures by Farmers in 

Tulkarm Governorate 

اإلشارة إليو اقخ بأن ما اشتسمت عميو ىحه الخسالة إنسا ىي نتاج جيجي الخاص، باستثشاء ما تست 
حيثسا ورد، وان ىحه الخسالة ككل، أو أي جدء مشيا لػ يقجم مؼ قبل لشيل أية درجة عمسية أو بحث 

 عمسي أو بحثي لجى أية مؤسدة تعميسية أو بحثية أخخى.

Declaration  

The work provided in this thesis unless otherwise referenced, is the 

researcher’s own work, and has not been submitted elsewhere for any other 

degree or qualification.  

 :Shaher Ahmed Hassan Al Sous Student’s Name اسػ الطالب:

 :Signature …………………………………… التؽقيع: 

 :Date 16/02/2021 التاريخ: 

 

 

  

ارعين في محافظة طولكر



vi 
 

 
 

Table of contents 

No. Subject Page 

 Defense Committee Members ii 

 Dedication iii 

 Acknowledgment  iv 

 Declaration  v 

 Table of contents  vi 

 List of Tables  ix 

 List of Figures  xii 

 List of Annex  xiii 

 Abstract  xiv 

Chapter One: Introduction 

1.1 Research background 1 

1.2 Research questions 3 

1.3 Problem Statement 4 

1.4 Research hypotheses 6 

 A- Geographical location 6 

 B- Education level 6 

 C- Farmers age 6 

 D- Gender differences (sex) 7 

 E- Endogenous knowledge (Pesticide use knowledge, 

attitude and practices) 7 

 F- Training services provided by governmental 

organization 
7 

 G- Training provided by nongovernmental organization 7 

1.5 1.5 Objectives 8 

1.6 1.6 Context of the study 8 

1.6.1 1.6.1 Study area 8 

1.6.2 1.6.2 Agriculture context 9 

Chapter Two: Theoretical Framework & Literature Review 

A Theoretical framework 12 

2.1 Definition of pesticides 12 

2.2 Reasons for pesticides intensive use 13 

2.3 Classification of pesticides 14 

2.4 Advantages of the use of pesticides 22 

2.5 Disadvantages of pesticides 22 

2.6 Major types of pesticides which used in Palestine 23 

2.7 Toxicological aspect of pesticides 23 

2.7.1 Toxicity of pesticides 23 



vii 
 

 
 

No. Subject Page 

2.7.2 Pesticide residues 25 

2.8 Common wrong practices when use, storage, transport 

and disposal of pesticides 
25 

2.9 Main types of personal protective equipment 26 

2.10 Pesticide alternatives 27 

2.11 Statistics about pesticides use 29 

2.11.1 International statistics about pesticides use 29 

2.11.2 Arab statistics about pesticides use 32 

32.11.3 Palestinian statistics about pesticides use 34 

B Literature review 36 

Chapter Three: Methodology 

3.1 Research design 43 

3.2 Inclusion & Exclusion Criteria 43 

3.2.1 Inclusion Criteria 43 

3.2.2 Exclusion Criteria 44 

3.3 Study Population 44 

3.4 Study period 44 

3.5 Sampling technique and sample size 44 

3.6 Study tool 44 

3.7 Response rate 45 

3.8 Construction of questionnaire 45 

3.9 Validity of questionnaire 46 

3.9.1  Face validity 46 

3.9.2 Content validity 47 

3.10 Pre-test of the questionnaire 47 

3.11 Reliability of questionnaire 47 

3.12 Data collection 48 

3.13 Data entry and analysis 48 

3.14 Ethical consideration 48 

3.15 Limitation of the study 49 

Chapter Four: Results and discussions 

A. Descriptive part 50 

A.4.1 Personal characteristics of the farmers 50 

A.4.2 Distribution of study participants by agricultural land 

characteristics 
55 

A.4.3 Distribution of study participants by their knowledge 

about the principles of pesticide use 
65 

A.4.4 Distribution of study participants by their knowledge 

about health and safety procedures while using 

pesticides 

87 



viii 
 

 
 

 Subject Page 

A.4.5 Distribution of study participants by health effects of 

pesticide use 
94 

A.4.6 Distribution of study participants to their action when 

strong pesticide 
99 

A.4.7 Distribution of study participants by identification of the 

environmental impacts of pesticide use 
107 

A.4.8 Distribution of study participants by challenges they 

faced and suggestions 
110 

B. Testing the study hypotheses 113 

B.4.1 The first hypothesis 113 

B.4.2 Testing the second hypothesis 118 

B.4.3 The third hypothesis 124 

B.4.4 The fourth hypothesis 129 

B.4.5 The fifth hypothesis 134 

B.4.6 The sixth hypothesis 138 

B.4.7 The seventh hypothesis 143 

Chapter Five: Conclusion and Recommendations 

5.1 Conclusion 148 

5.2 Recommendations 152 

 References 155 

 Annexces  162 

 ة انًهطض 
 

  



ix 
 

 
 

List of Tables 

No. Subject Page 

Table (1) Distribution of study participants by current work 45 

Table (2) 
Distribution of study participants by family 

members 
44 

Table (3) 
Distribution of study participants by total area of 

agricultural land 
45 

Table (4) 
Distribution of study participants by the area of 

agricultural land currently used 
45 

Table (5) Distribution of study participants by studied area 45 

Table (6) 
Distribution of study participants by the types of 

crops they grow in their lands 
06 

Table (7) 
Distribution of study participants by agricultural 

problems 
06 

Table (8) 
Distribution of study participants by agricultural 

extension services in the studied area 
05 

Table (9) 
Distribution of study participants by characteristics 

of workers in the agricultural land 
00 

Table (10) 
Distribution of study participants by making 

decision of related pesticides to use. 
05 

Table (11) 
Distribution of study participants according to the 

main reasons for using pesticides 
56 

Table (12) 
Distribution of study participants by reasons for 

using pesticides 
56 

Table (13) 
Distribution of study participants by weather 

conditions when using pesticides 
54 

Table (14) 
Distribution of study participants according to 

pesticides quantity used in their farms 
50 

Table (15) 
Distribution of study participants by follow 

recommendation and instructions. 
56 

Table (16) 
Distribution of study participants by mixing the 

pesticides. 
58 

Table (17) 
Distribution of study participants by source of 

information about pesticide 
58 

Table (18) 
Distribution of study participants by actions related 

to pesticides spraying 
50 

Table (19) 

Distribution of study participants by training and 

knowledge about using pesticides, and pests & 

diseases management 

55 



x 
 

 
 

No. Subject Page 

Table (20) 
Distribution of study participants by applying the 

precautions for using pesticides in agriculture land 
56 

Table (21) 
Distribution of study participants by using personal 

protective equipment 
58 

Table (22) 
Distribution of study participants by health effects of 

pesticide use 
54 

Table (23) 

Table (23): Distribution of study participants by 

medical management in the case of injuries due to 

using pesticides 

55 

Table (24) 
Table (24): Distribution of study participants by site 

of storing pesticides 
866 

Table (25) 
Table (25): Distribution of study participants by 

actions toward empty pesticide containers 
868 

Table (26) 

Table (26): Distribution of study participants by 

educational campaigns about disposal of pesticide 

containers 

865 

Table (27) 
Table (27): Distribution of study participants by 

actions toward remaining quantities of pesticides 
864 

Table (28) 

Table (28): Distribution of study participants by 

application of warning procedures in the place of 

storing pesticides 

865 

Table (29) 

Table (29): Relationship between geographical 

location and farmer’s knowledge of safe use of 

agricultural pesticides 

865 

Table (30) 

Table ( 30): Distribution of study participants by 

obstacles that facing farms in Tulkarm, "from the 

point of view of the farmer." 

886 

Table (31) 

Table (31): Distribution of study participants by 

farmers suggestions to reduce the risks of pesticides 

in Tulkarm 

886 

Table (32) 

Table (32): Relationship between geographical 

location and farmer’s knowledge of safe use of 

agricultural pesticides 

885 

Table (33) 
Table (33): Relationship between geographical 

location and safety measures implementation 
884 

Table (34) 

Table (34): Relationship between education level 

and farmer’s knowledge of safe use of agricultural 

pesticides 

885 

Table (35) 
Table (35): Relationship between education level 

and safety measures implementation 
868 



xi 
 

 
 

No. Subject Page 

Table (36) 

Table (36): Relationship between farmer’s age and 

farmer’s knowledge of safe use of agricultural 

pesticides 

864 

Table (37) 
Relationship between farmer’s age and safety 

measures implementation 
865 

Table (38) 

Relationship between gender differences and 

farmer’s knowledge of safe use of agricultural 

pesticides 

886 

Table (39) 
Relationship between gender differences and safety 

measures implementation. 
886 

Table (40) 
Relationship between pesticide use and farmer’s 

knowledge of safe use of agricultural pesticides 
885 

Table (41) 
Relationship between pesticide use and safety 

measures implementation 
880 

Table (42) 

Table (42): Relationship between training provided 

by governmental organization and farmer’s 

knowledge of safe use of agricultural pesticides. 

885 

Table (43) 

Relationship between training provided by 

governmental organization and safety measures 

implementation 

858 

Table (44) 

Relationship between training provided by 

nongovernmental organization and safe use of 

agricultural pesticides. 

858 

Table (45) 

Relationship between training provided by 

nongovernmental organization and safety measures 

implementation. 

854 

 

  



xii 
 

 
 

List of Figures 

No. Subject Page 

Figure (1) Classification of insecticides 68 

Figure (2) Personal protective equipment 60 

Figure (3) 
Total global pesticide production and global pesticide 

imports, 1940s-2000 
86 

Figure (4) Pesticide production in US by type 86 

Figure (5) Percentage of pesticide use around the world 88 

Figure (6) Percentage of pesticide use by continent 88 

Figure (7) Percentage of pesticide use for top 10 countries 86 

Figure (8) Total pesticide use of some Arab countries. 86 

Figure (9) 
Pesticide use per hectare of cropland of some Arab 

countries 
88 

Figure (10) Pesticide breakdown by type in Jordan 88 

Figure (11) Total pesticide use in Palestine 85 

Figure (12) Total insecticide use in Palestine 85 

Figure (13) Pesticide use per hectare of cropland in Palestine 84 

Figure (14) Figure (14): Pesticide breakdown by type in Palestine 84 

Figure (15) Distribution of study participants by gender 48 

Figure (16) Distribution of study participants by age group 48 

Figure (17) Distribution of study participants by marital status 46 

Figure (18) Distribution of study participants by educational level 48 

Figure (19) Distribution of study participants by land ownership 40 

Figure (20) 
Distribution of study participants by supervising the 

farm 
04 

Figure (21) 
Distribution of study participants by pesticides 

preparation 
55 

Figure (22) 
Distribution of study participants by pesticide 

selection 
55 

Figure (23) 
Distribution of study participants by determine the 

dose of the pesticide 
55 

 

 



xiii 
 

 
 

List of Annexes 

No. Title Page 

Annex (1) Insecticides, Acaricides and Nematicides in Palestine 806 

Annex (2) Fungicides & Bactericide in Palestine 805 

Annex (3) Herbicides   & Defoliants in Palestine 858 

Annex (4) Molluscides in Palestine 854 

Annex (5) Rodenticide in Palestine  850 

Annex (6) Fumigants in Palestine 855 

Annex (7) Chemicals allowed for use in agriculture. 855 

Annex (8) Sample size calculator 856 

Annex (9) Questionnaire 858 

Annex (10) Expert's name 856 

Annex (11) Map of Tulkarm Governorate 858 

 

  



xiv 
 

 
 

Knowledge of Safe Use of Agricultural  

Pesticide and Application of Safety Measures 

by Farmers in Tulkarm Governorate 

by 

Shaher Ahmed Hassan Al Sous 

Supervisor 

Dr. Abdel Fattah Hasan 

Co-Supervisor 

Dr. Tawfiq Qubbaj 

Abstract 

The abundant and intensive use of pesticides has led to many problems 

worldwide. This descriptive and statistical study is aiming at assessing the 

knowledge about the use of agricultural pesticide and the safety measures 

among the farmers in Tulkarm governorate. The sample of 350 farmers, of 

which 79% are males and 21% are females were subject to a questionnaire 

from which the response rate was 100%.  

The results showed that 71.1% of the farmers faced agriculture problems; 

the most common of which are different crops diseases. 96% of the farmers 

used pesticides, mainly Confidor. 91.7% stick to the recommended 

pesticide's dose and 83.1% used to read the information on the pesticide 

card and follow the instructions. 59.1% of the farmers are not trained for 

safety measures while 56.9% participants did not attend courses to raise 

awareness about the dangers of pesticides. Moreover, 62.6% are not trained 

in integrated pest management, insect and disease identification and 

prevention, while 72.3% looked for information to develop their knowledge 

about pesticides. In addition, 72% of the farmers sought to take courses on 

the safe use of pesticides and 85.1% expressed their interest in knowing 



xv 
 

 
 

appropriate solutions to reduce the excessive use of pesticides. The 

statistical analysis showed that there is significant difference between the 

geographical location of the farms and the statistical parameters: using 

pesticides, knowing the amount of applied pesticides, calculate the required 

dose, adhere to the recommended dose, placing a warning sign on the field, 

check spray equipment before using, and using mixing tools.  

There is also significant difference between education level of the farmers 

and reading the information on the pesticide card, following the 

instructions, reading the pesticide label, calculate the required dose; 

conform the expiration date, clean the spray tools, washing hands, and 

change clothes after spraying. Statistical difference between farmer’s age 

and use hands to mix without protection is also significant. Between the 

gender of the farmers and placing a warning sign on the field sprayed with 

pesticides or where the pesticides are, use PPE when dealing with 

pesticides and chemicals and use hands to mix without protection there is 

also a significant difference.  

The training provided by governmental organization and NGOs to the 

farmers has also significant difference with placing warning signs on the 

field or where the pesticides are, using PPE when dealing with pesticides 

and chemicals, mixing with hands without protection, examination of insect 

and disease samples before using the pesticide, and adhere to the pre-

harvest interval period. 

Keywords: Pesticides, Safety Measures, PPE, Tulkarm Governorate. 



1 
 

 
 

Chapter One 

Introduction 

1.1 Background 

Humans knew pesticides a long time ago. Ancient civilizations used certain 

materials and applied them to crops to reduce insect infestation or minimize 

the damage caused by insects to plants.  

Pesticides are mainly used to increase crop productivity by managing the 

pest population. The most commonly used pesticide are synthetic chemical 

products, which are generally used to protect plants from the harmful 

effects of different pests, such as weeds, pathogens or insects (Mohammed, 

Bader EL-Din, Sadek, & Mohammed, 2018). The use of pesticides has 

increased dramatically since the 1960s. In 2007 the French Ministry of 

Agriculture estimated that 2.4 billion kg of active pesticide compounds 

were applied worldwide (French Ministry of Agriculture, 2014). 

The use of pesticides worldwide has increasingly become necessity to 

produce high quantity and quality of crops to meet global demand. 

However, the abundant and intensive use of pesticides has led to many 

problems worldwide: environmental problems, human health concerns, 

high pesticide residues in food, as well as increased production costs. 

The environmental effects of pesticides include air and soil pollution, 

contamination of groundwater and loss of beneficial insects and natural 

enemies as bees, predators and parasites (which has led to widespread and 



2 
 

 
 

outbreaks of pest and disease). Despite all these impacts and costs, farmers 

continue to use pesticides in most countries at an increasing rate, while 

biological pest control methods are still limited (Wilson & Tisdell, 2001). 

Several human health effects associated with the use of pesticides have 

been reported directly, such as; poisoning or irritation of the nose, throat, 

and skin causing burning, stinging and itching as well as rashes and 

blisters. Nausea, dizziness and diarrhea are also common, or on long term 

human diseases development such as; cancer; brain and nervous system 

damage; congenital disabilities; infertility and related reproductive 

problems; and damage to the liver, kidneys, lungs and other body organs 

(Californians for Pesticide Reform, 2020). Humans could be exposed to 

pesticides during the handling, application, manufacturing and 

transportation of pesticides as well as when consuming agricultural 

products contaminated with pesticides. Most pesticides will cause harmful 

effects if they are ingested accidentally or intentionally or touch the skin 

for a long time. Pesticide particles may be inhaled with air during spraying 

application. There is additional risk by the contamination of drinking water 

or food (World Health Organization, 2000). 

People who work with pesticides must receive appropriate training on safe 

handling and application of pesticides (World Health Organization, 2000). 

According to the accident records issued by the Health and Safety 

Authority, a farmer is seven times more likely to be seriously harmed at 

work compared to other workers in any field or business sector. Older 



3 
 

 
 

people and young children are particularly at higher risk of being injured or 

killed (Aviva Insurance Limited, 2014). 

Special precautions must be taken during transport, storage and handling of 

pesticides. Spray equipment should be cleaned regularly and maintained to 

prevent leakage. Pesticides will not be hazardous to humans and non-target 

animal species if appropriate precautions are applied. 

Personal protective equipment does not prevent the accident but may 

reduce the harmful effects on human. Therefore, the personal protective 

equipment must be carefully chosen and tested to see how well it can 

ensure prevention for those who use it.  

The unsafe and intensive use of pesticides in agriculture causes a 

significant risk to human health and environment. Changing the legislation, 

applying integrated pest management and genetically modified crops in the 

agricultural production systems are still not efficient in reducing the huge 

pesticides usage. Especially under the pressure of increasing the demands 

on agricultural products to meet the population growth, pesticide resistance 

by pests, economic factors, and the high cost of the alternative 

environmentally friendly pest controls measures (Abbassy, 2017). 

1.2 Research questions 

This research aims to shed light and deeply investigate and document the 

current farmer’s knowledge and the most commonly applied practices of 

handling and using pesticides among Palestinian farmers in Tulkarm 



4 
 

 
 

governorate as a representative case study. Therefore, the following 

questions were highlighted and answered by farmers. 

- What is the level of farmers’ knowledge about pesticide safety 

applications in Tulkarm governorate? 

- Are the farmers in Tulkarm governorate applying safety practices 

(including the adoption of personal protective equipment) when 

handling pesticides? 

- What are the farmers implemented practices related to disposal, 

storage and handling of pesticides?    

- What are the main obstacles facing farmers in Tulkarm governorate? 

1.3 Problem statement 

The use of pesticides for effective pest control is regulated in a way that the 

safety limits are not reached when applying according to the good 

agricultural practices. Environmental contamination, water contamination, 

air pollution, aquatic habitat as well as human health are endangered due to 

intensive pesticides application, poor equipment, lack of safety measures, 

pesticide misuse, poor extension services and the absence of strong policies 

for pesticide (Amuoh, 2011). 

Globally, there are many cases of pesticide poisoning, which claimed the 

lives of many due to the misuse of pesticides, lack of awareness of its 

seriousness, non-compliance with the recommended dose and safety 

periods, and non-compliance with safety procedures & practices when 



5 
 

 
 

dealing with pesticides, including the use of personal protective equipment, 

disposal of empty containers and quick actions to be taken if being 

poisoned, all this In light of the weakness of extension services in the field 

of pesticides (Damalas & Eleftherohorinos, 2011).  

The presence of pesticides ubiquity makes it imperative to conduct high 

quality studies of these chemicals. Pesticides have been linked to numerous 

adverse health outcomes, including cancer, non-malignant respiratory 

disease, neurological outcomes and developmental issues (French Ministry 

of Agriculture, 2014). 

In Palestine, now the study of pesticides and their impact on human health 

and environment is considered one of the most important and high priority 

issues, due to its significant role directly influencing the health of 

Palestinian as well as other living organisms.  

Tulkarm governorate is considered an important agricultural area in 

Palestine, and a main producer for vegetables in the local market. Like in 

many other Palestinian areas, intensive and increasing amounts of 

pesticides are currently used. With a lack of actual information and 

scientific research data about pesticide knowledge and safety practices 

among farmers (Isaac & Hrimat, 2007).   

This study focused and sheds light on this serious problem, in order to 

contribute in the protection of farmers and agricultural workers and their 

families from exposure to the danger of pesticides. Moreover, to reinforce 



6 
 

 
 

the capabilities of farmers to follow safety and security practices. In 

addition to protecting agricultural products from pollution, as well as 

increase the rate of gross domestic product in the Palestinian economy, as a 

result of increase agricultural production and protecting the agricultural 

environment from pollution. 

This study will help policy makers for an in-depth understanding of the 

current situation on pesticide application and misused application in order 

to prompt policy-makers to take action. 

1.4 Research hypotheses 

A. Geographical location  

The Main Hypothesis (H01): There is no significant impact of geographical 

location on the farmer’s knowledge on safe use of agricultural pesticides 

and safety measures implementation at the level of ( ≤0.05). 

B. Education level  

H02: There is no significant impact of farmer’s education level on the 

knowledge of safe use of agricultural pesticides and safety measures 

implementation at the level of ( ≤0.05). 

C. Farmers age  

H03: There is no significant impact of farmer’s age on the knowledge of 

safe use of agricultural pesticides and safety measures implementation at 

the level of ( ≤0.05). 



7 
 

 
 

D. Gender differences  

H04: There is no significant impact of gender differences on the farmer’s 

knowledge on safe use of agricultural pesticides and safety measures 

implementation at the level of ( ≤0.05). 

E. Endogenous knowledge (Pesticide use knowledge, attitude and 

practices) 

Lack of user previous knowledge on pesticide type and toxicity are some of 

the current major issues associated with the pesticide misuse. 

H05: There is no significant impact of farmer’s endogenous knowledge on 

pesticide application and the farmer’s knowledge on safe use of agricultural 

pesticides and safety measures implementation at the level of ( ≤0.05). 

F. Training services provided by governmental organization 

H06: There is no significant impact of training provided by governmental 

organization on the knowledge of safe use of agricultural pesticides and 

safety measures implementation at the level of ( ≤0.05). 

G. Training provided by nongovernmental organization 

H07: There is no significant impact of training provided by 

nongovernmental organization on the knowledge of safe use of agricultural 

pesticides and safety measures implementation at the level of ( ≤0.05). 

 



8 
 

 
 

1.5 Objectives 

The general objective of this study was to assess the agricultural pesticide 

knowledge and application of safety measures among farmers in Tulkarm 

governorate. Moreover; this study will:  

- Compare the level of knowledge on safety measures of pesticide 

application among farmers in four localities in Tulkarm governorate 

(Asharaweyah, wadi ashaeer, kafryat and the city and its suburb). 

- Describe the agricultural situation in Tulkarm governorate. 

- Assess farmers practices that related to disposal, storage and 

handling of pesticides; evaluate the protective measures taken by 

farmers, including the adoption of personal protective equipment, to 

reduce pesticide exposure. 

- Identify the obstacles facing farmers in Tulkarm governorate.  

1.6 Context of the study 

1.6.1 Study area 

The area of Tulkarm governorate is 246.5 km
2
; (Palestinian Central Bureau 

of Statistics, 2017). See Annex 11. Tulkarm is located in the central west of 

Palestine, in the north of the West Bank and in the eastern part of the 

coastal plain of Palestine. It is located about 15 km from the Mediterranean 

coast, also located southwest of Jenin and northwest of Nablus. 120 m 

above sea level, as well as it is located at geographical latitude 9-532 north 



9 
 

 
 

of the equator, and geographic longitude 1-535 east of Greenwich. The 

lands of Tulkarm constitute a separation between the territory of the 

Palestinian National Authority and the Palestinian territories occupied since 

1948 (Tulkarem Municipality, 2018). 

It is characterized by its location on the boundary between the fertile 

coastal plain at the west of the city and the mountainous lands that extend 

to the east of the city. The city's land is distributed between the plain areas, 

which constitute about 40%, and the mountainous areas, which make up 

60% of the total area of Tulkarm. Thus, part of these lands is used for 

agriculture and grazing, while the other part is used in housing and 

construction (Tulkarem Municipality, 2018). 

Tulkarm is characterized by a subtropical climate, the average temperature 

in winter is 8-16 C
o
 and in summer is 17-30 C

o
. Humidity is 69.6% in 

winter, but in summer months it is wet with medium humidity 70.3% 

(Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, 2011). 

1.6.2 Agriculture context 

Tulkarm governorate is famous for its fertile lands and the interest of its 

people in agriculture; where they depend on agriculture for their 

livelihoods. 

Agriculture is considered as one of the most important economic tributaries 

of the governorate; this sector absorbs many of the labor force, which 

reduces the prevalence of unemployment among the workers, reflecting an 



10 
 

 
 

improvement in the economic life cycle among the community (Al-Hewiti, 

2017). 

There are many agricultural crops in Tulkarm, the most famous are: 

 Olive: The area of land planted with olive trees is about 119711 

dunums. Olive trees made up 95% of the cultivated horticulture trees 

in Tulkarm. 

 Greenhouses: The area of agricultural land for greenhouses about 

8000 dunums. 

 Citrus: The area of land planted with citrus in Tulkarm Governorate 

is about 5200 dunums. 

 Field Crops: includes wheat, barley, lentils, onions, okra and many 

other crops; the area planted with field crops is about 6400 dunums. 

(Rainfed constitute 79% and irrigated 21% of the total field land 

area). 

 There are agricultural crops that have become widespread recently 

and the farms are interested in cultivating it, such as: mangoes, 

avocados, walnuts, java and thyme plantation, which are spread in 

most of the plains of Tulkarm. 

 Almonds: such as almond, cherry and apricot trees. (Al-Hewiti, 

2017). 

 



11 
 

 
 

Reasons for the decline in the area of agricultural land in Tulkarm: 

 First: The Israeli Occupation Practices on the Land: The crimes of 

the occupation against the land and the citizen: 

A. The Israeli occupation erected the separation wall west of 

Tulkarm. 

B. The Israeli occupation has established settlements on citizens' 

lands in Tulkarm. 

 Second: Despite the abundance of water resources, the Israeli 

occupation imposed severe restrictions on how to exploit the water 

and imposed strict control on the artesian wells in the governorate, 

where monitor and restrict the amount of water pumped for the 

benefit of the farmer and the Palestinian citizen. The occupation also 

exploited the water basin located behind the wall on the lands of 

Tulkarm, in addition to isolating about 5 artesian wells behind the 

wall. 

 Third: the urban expansion due to the continuous increase in the 

population. 

 Fourth: Establishing economic projects on agricultural lands. 

 Fifth: Lack of awareness among farmers. (Al-Hewiti, 2017). 

 

  



12 
 

 
 

Chapter Two 

Theoretical Framework & Literature Review 

Agricultural products are infected by various pests that destroy the crops. 

They account to huge loss of crop yields. This result is suffering for both 

the farmer and the workers. It becomes important for both the farmer and 

his workers to work together to ensure that crops are not destroyed. It is 

also important that they both work together to ensure that in the course of 

work activities workers are not exposed to risks that may cause ill health, 

injuries and even death. Therefore, the knowledge and understanding of 

pesticides used in agriculture is an important step in applying good health 

and safety standards (Department of employment and labour in South 

Africa, 2016). 

The application of pesticides affects workers and their families. Since most 

farm workers and their families live on the farms or near the farms. 

Environmental problems are also caused by use, overuse or misuse of these 

pesticides (Department of employment and labour in South Africa, 2016). 

A. Theoretical framework 

2.1 Definition of pesticides 

Pesticides: Are substances intended to prevent, disease or control in plants 

or animals’ disease and pests, including vectors of human and animal 

diseases, unwanted species of plant, or to control the behavior or 

physiology of pests or crops during production or storage. They include 



13 
 

 
 

insecticides herbicides, fungicides, acaricides, termiticides and rodenticides 

and other substances (FAO, 2010). 

2.2 Reasons for pesticides intensive use 

 Rapid Impact: Agricultural pesticides are characterized by rapid 

action and directly affect pests, even if they have negative effects 

later, but their direct and rapid impact affects pests and eliminates 

them as soon as possible if used according to the correct guidelines 

set for them. 

 Cheap price: Pesticides are cheap agricultural supplements that 

farmers resort to periodically, and are available in large quantities 

due to the proliferation of companies producing them, as well as 

scientific advances that have been able to integrate these elements 

and chemical components easily. In addition, biological evolution 

has discovered many pesticides that work for the same purpose, 

making competition among producers and making pesticides more 

affordable than they used to be. 

 Easy to use: It is known that pesticides are easy to use and do not 

need someone specializing in agricultural sciences or agricultural 

engineering to deal with them, and the illiterate farmer can be use it 

in the quantities set by the agricultural guide, taking into account the 

appropriate times for spraying. 

 Accessibility: Pesticides are widely available in various agricultural 

associations, institutions, agencies and entities specialized in 



14 
 

 
 

agriculture around the world, whatever their name, which makes 

their access very large and available to the farmer around the clock, 

in addition, the ministries of agriculture are keen to provide 

pesticides to the farmer and to deliver it as much as possible to 

ensure the production of a good exportable crop and to generate a 

hard currency for the country. (Menna, 2008). 

2.3 Classification of pesticides 

 The classification based on the basis of use can be as follows: 

Acaricides, Algicide, Antifeedants, Avicides, Bactericides, Bird repellents, 

Chemosterillant, Fungicides, Herbicide softeners, Herbicides, Insect 

attractants, Insect repellents, Insecticides, Mammal repellents, Mating 

disrupters, Molluscicides, Nematicides, Plant activators, Plant growth 

regulators, Rodenticides, Synergists, Virucides and Miscellaneous. 

Acaricides: are the substances that are used to kill mites and ticks, or to 

disrupt their growth or development. And some of the examples are DDT, 

dicofol, carbofuran, methiocarb, Propoxur, abamectin, milbemectin, 

flufenoxuron, chlorpyrifos, oxydemeton methyl, Phorate, Phosalone, 

fenpyroximate, Fipronil, bifenthrin, cyhalothrin, fluvalinate, permethrin, 

and chlorfenapyr. 

Algicide: are the substances that are used to kill or inhibit algae. Some of 

the examples are copper sulfate, diuron, isoproturon, isoproturon, 

oxyfluorfen, and simazine. 



15 
 

 
 

Antifeedants: are the chemicals which prevent an insect or other pest from 

feeding. Some of the examples are chlordimeforn, fentin and azadirachtin. 

Avicides: are the chemicals that are used to kill birds. Some of the 

examples are fenthion, and strychnine. 

Bactericides: are the compounds that are isolated from or produced by a 

microorganism (e.g. a bacterium or a fungus), or a related chemical that is 

produced artificially. Which are used to kill or inhibit bacteria in plants or 

soil. Some of the examples are copper hydroxide, kasugamycin, 

streptomycin, and tetracycline. 

Bird repellents: are the chemicals which act as the bird repellants. Some of 

the examples are copper oxychloride, diazinon, methiocarb, thiram, and 

ziram. 

Chemosterillant: are the chemicals that renders an insect infertile and thus 

prevents it from reproducing. Some insects that mate only once can be 

controlled or eradicated by releasing huge numbers of sterilized insects, 

which act as sterilizing substances for the insects. All of these acts in one of 

the three ways: (a) They inhibit the production of egg or spam. If it fails 

then go to the second stages; (b) Cause death of the spam or eggs; (c) If 

these steps are failed totally then these bring about lethal mutation on the 

spam or eggs material and severally damage the genetic material and 

chromatin material of eggs and spam. This produce zygote, but the off 

springs will totally lose their reproduction ability. (e.g. diflubenzuron). 



16 
 

 
 

Fungicides: are the chemicals which are used to prevent, cure eradicate the 

fungi. Some of the examples are cymoxanil, carpropamid, metalaxyl, 

metalaxyl-M, carboxin, aureofungin, kasugamycin, streptomycin, 

validamycin, kasugamycin, carbendazim, thiabendazole, thiophanate-

methyl, cyproconazole, difenoconazole, flusilazole, tebuconazole, 

triadimefon, Bordeaux mixture, copper oxychloride, iprodione, captan, 

ferbam, thiram, ziram, mancozeb, maneb, metiram, propineb, zineb, 

isoprothiolane, tridemorph, edifenphos, fosetyl-Al, fenarimol, and 

tricyclazole. 

Herbicide softeners: A chemical that protects crops from injury by 

herbicides, but does not prevent the herbicide from killing weeds. 

Examples are benoxacor, cloquintocet, cyometrinil, and cyprosulfamide 

Herbicides: are the substances that are used to kill plants, or to inhibit their 

growth or development. Some of the examples are alachlor, butachlor, 

metolachlor, pretilachlor, methabenzthiazuron, pendimethalin, oxyfluorfen, 

imazethapyr, anilofos, glyphosate, oxadiargyl, oxadiazon, 2,4-D, 

clodinafop, cyhalofop, quizalofop, Paraquat, atrazine, isoproturon, linuron, 

metoxuron, chlorimuron, and sulfosulfuron. 

Insect attractant: A chemical that lures pests to a trap, thereby removing 

them from crops, animals or stored products. Examples are Gossyplure, 

Gyplure, and Muscalure (name ends with lure as they lure the pests). 



17 
 

 
 

Insect repellents: A chemical that deters an insect from landing on a 

human or an animal. Some of the examples are Citronella oil, and 

Permethrin. 

Insect Growth regulator: A substance that works by disrupting the growth 

or development of an insect. Some of the examples are. Diflubenzuron, and 

buprofezin. 

Insecticides: A pesticide that is used to kill insects, or to disrupt their 

growth or development. Some of the examples are azadirachtin, pyrethrins, 

carbofuran, carbosulfan, methomyl, buprofezin, diflubenzuron, fenoxycarb, 

abamectin, emamectin, milbemectin, spinosad, cartap, clothianidin, 

imidacloprid , thiamethoxam, Acetamiprid, Thiacloprid, DDT, Lindane, 

Endosulfan, dichlorvos, monocrotophos, phosphamidon, demeton-O-

methyl, Ethion, Malathion, phorate, Dimethoate, Phosalone, azinphos-

methyl, chlorpyrifos, pirimiphos-methyl, quinalphos, triazophos, cyfluthrin, 

cyhalothrin, lambda-cyhalothrin, cypermethrin, alpha-cypermethrin, 

cyphenothrin, deltamethrin, fenpropathrin, esfenvalerate, fluvalinate, 

imiprothrin, tofenprox, chlorfenapyr, clothianidin thiamethoxam, 

Thiacloprid, and isoprothiolane. 

Mammal repellents: A chemical that deters mammals from approaching 

or feeding on crops or stored products. 

Mating disrupters: are the chemicals that interfere with the way that male 

and female insects locate each other using airborne chemicals 

(pheromones), thereby preventing them from reproducing. 



18 
 

 
 

Molluscicides: are the substances used to kill slugs and snails. Some of the 

examples are copper sulfate, metaldehyde, thiacloprid, and thiodicarb. 

Nematicides: are the chemicals which are used to control Nematicides. 

Some of the examples are abamectin, benomyl, carbofuran, carbosulfan, 

methyl bromide, fenamiphos, phosphamidon, chlorpyrifos, dimethoate, 

phorate, and triazophos. 

Plant growth regulators: are the substances that alters the expected 

growth, flowering or reproduction rate of plants. Fertilizers and other plant 

nutrients are excluded from this definition. Some of the examples are 2,4-

D, α-naphthaleneacetic acid, ethephon, metoxuron, gibberellic acid, 

chlormequat, paclobutrazol, and triacontanol. 

Rodenticides: are the substances used to kill rats and related animals. 

Some of the examples are strychnine, bromadiolone, coumachlor, 

coumatetralyl, warfarin, zinc phosphide, Lindane, and aluminium 

phosphide. 

Synergists: A chemical that enhances the toxicity of a pesticide to a pest, 

but that is not by itself toxic to the pest. Example: piperonyl butoxide. 

Virucide: an agent having the capacity to destroy or inactivate viruses. 

Example: Ribavirin. 

Miscellaneous: aluminium phosphide, and sodium cyanide. 



19 
 

 
 

Biologicals: Viruses, bacteria, fungi, and plants Nematodes, insects and 

other parasites or predators. 

(National Institute of Plant Health Management "NIPHM", 2011). 

 Classification on the basis of the chemistry 

A large number of group of chemicals are available in the list pesticides but 

the researcher will be confined to the most common pesticides. 

a) Insecticides: The insecticides can be classified as Oregano halogen, 

Organophosphorous, Carbamates, Pyrethroids, Neonicotinoids, 

Miscellaneous pesticides, Spinosyns (spinosad), neriestoxin (cartap), 

Fiproles or Phenylpyrazoles (Fipronil), Pyrroles (chlorfenapyr), 

Quinazolines (fenazaquin), Benzoylureas (diflubenzuron), Antibiotics 

(abamectin) etc. 

b) Fungicides: The fungicides are aliphatic nitrogen fungicides (dodine), 

amide fungicides (carpropamid), acylamino acid fungicides (metalaxyl), 

anilide fungicides (carboxin), antibiotic fungicides (kasugamycin), 

methoxyacrylate strobilurin fungicides (azoxystrobin), aromatic fungicides 

(chlorothalonil), carbamate fungicides or benzimidazole fungicides 

(carbendazim), conazole fungicides (triazoles) (hexaconazole), copper 

fungicides, dicarboximide fungicides (famoxadone), dichlorophenyl 

dicarboximide fungicides (iprodione), dinitrophenol fungicides (dinocap), 

dithiocarbamate fungicides (mancozeb), dithiolane fungicides 



20 
 

 
 

(isoprothiolane), morpholine fungicides (tridemorph), Sulphur compounds 

etc. 

c) Herbicides: The herbicides are anilide herbicides (flufenacet), 

chloroacetanilide herbicides (butachlor), pyrimidinyloxybenzoic acid 

herbicides (bispyribac), benzothiazoleherbicides (methabenzthiazuron), 

dinitroanilineherbicides (pendimethalin), nitrophenyl ether herbicides 

(oxyfluorfen), halogenated aliphatic herbicides (dalapon), imidazolinone 

herbicides (imazethapyr), organophosphorus herbicides (anilofos), 

phenoxyacetic herbicides (2,4-D), aryloxyphenoxypropionic herbicides 

(clodinafop), quaternary ammonium herbicides (Paraquat), chlorotriazine 

herbicides (atrazine), triazolone herbicides (carfentrazone), Urea herbicides 

(methabenzthiazuron), phenylurea herbicides (isoproturon), sulfonylurea 

herbicides (chlorimuron). 

d) Rodenticides: Inorganic Rodenticides: (Zinc Phosphide, Aluminium 

Phosphide, Magnesium Phosphide) coumarin Rodenticides (organic) 

(bromadiolone, coumachlor, coumatetralyl). (National Institute of Plant 

Health Management "NIPHM", 2011) 

The most common and useful method of classifying pesticide is based on 

their chemical composition and nature of active ingredients. It is such kind 

of classification that gives the clue about the efficacy, physical and 

chemical properties of the respective pesticides. The information on 

chemical and physical characteristics of pesticides is very useful in 

determining the mode of application, precautions that need to be taken 



21 
 

 
 

during application and the application rates. Based on chemical 

composition, pesticides are classified into four main groups namely; 

organochlorines, organophosphorus, carbamates and pyrethrin and 

pyrethroids. The chemical-based classification of pesticides is rather 

complex. In general, modern pesticides are organic chemicals (Fig. 1) 

(Kaur, Mavi, & Ragha, 2019). 

 
Figure (1): Classification of insecticides. 

Source: (Kaur, Mavi, & Ragha, 2019). 

Insecticides 

Natural 

Plant based 

Pyrethrum 

Azadirachin 

Mineral oils 

Synthetic 

Inorganic Organic 

Organochlorines 

DDT 

BHC 

Organophosphates
  

Malathion.  

Temephos.  

Fenthion. 

Dichlorvos. 

Fenitrothion. 

Pirimiphos 
methyl. 

carbamates 

Propoxur. 

Bendiocarb. 

Carbaryl. 

Pyrethroids 

Deltamethrin. 

Cyfluthrin. 

Bifenthrin. 

Lambda-
cyhalothrin. 

Permethrin. 



22 
 

 
 

The chemical-based classification of pesticides is rather complex. In 

general, modern pesticides are organic chemicals. They include pesticides 

of both synthetic and plant origin. However, some inorganic compounds 

are also used as pesticides. Insecticides are important pesticides that can be 

further classified into several sub-classes (Kaur, Mavi, & Ragha, 2019). 

2.4 Advantages of the use of pesticides 

The advantages of the use of pesticides are: Cost effectiveness 

"inexpensive", crop protection, control pests, greater yields, effective and 

rapid, increase food supplies, flexibility in using it, used to kill unwanted 

plants or weeds which is grown in the field, prevention of problems and 

disease "controlling the growth of mosquitoes which may cause yellow 

fever or malaria. It is also used to kill houseflies, cockroaches, lice, 

poisonous insects to prevent disease caused by it", protect stored food 

grains and it helps to contribute and enhance human health by controlling 

the disease spread (Frndzzz, 2019). 

2.5 Disadvantages of pesticides 

The disadvantages of pesticides are: (1) The chemicals used in pesticides 

are slightly harmful and kills beneficial species of interest and reduces their 

population. (2) When pesticides are applied to food crops, residues of 

pesticides may remain on or in food and may be harmful to the body if it is 

available in higher level. (3) Sometimes pesticides may also eliminate 

natural enemies of pests such as predators and parasites, leads to increase in 

population of pests. (4) Promotes genetic resistance. (5) Health risks 



23 
 

 
 

to both human as well as animals and different types of organisms; 

"The pesticides used are hazardous and poisonous which may have toxic 

effect on infants, children and adults if they come in contact with the 

body". (6) Ground water contamination. (7) Pollutes the environment in 

general. and (8) Pesticides may accumulate and enter in food chain 

(Frndzzz, 2019). 

2.6 Major types of pesticides which used in Palestine 

(See annexes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7). 

2.7 Toxicological aspect of pesticides 

2.7.1 Toxicity of pesticides 

Toxicity is the detrimental or adverse effect of any substance or mixture of 

several substances on the organism. It is divided into: 

 Acute toxicity: the harmful effect that occurs to the organism after 

exposure to the pesticide for a short time and once or multiple times 

during a short period. 

 Sub-acute toxicity: the harmful effect that occurs to the organism as 

a result of repeated or persistent exposure to the pesticide for 30 to 

90 days. 

 Chronic toxicity: the harmful effect that occurs to the organism as a 

result of repeated or persistent exposure to the pesticide longer than 

half of the life of this organism. 



24 
 

 
 

In general, all pesticides can be considered toxic substances, and the degree 

of toxicity of a pesticide varies depending on the dose and sensitivity of the 

organism, whether human, plant or animal, as well as the ability to cause 

poisoning and its severity varies according to age, gender, health status, 

nutrition and pesticides formulation. It is worth mentioning that the toxicity 

of the chemical is measured by the Lethal Dose Standard, LD50, which is a 

dose in mg/kg of body weight that kills 50% of the experimental animal 

population (Agricultural Pesticides Committee, 2017). 

Signs and symptoms of pesticide toxicity 

In general: severe weakness and fatigue (El-Nahaal, 2016). 

Skin: itching, burning sensation, excessive sweating and appearance of 

spots. 

Eyes: desire to itch, burning sensation, runny tears, vision becomes 

difficult or unclear and dilated or narrowed pupils. 

Digestive system: heartburn, severe salivation, nausea, dizziness, vomiting, 

abdominal pain and diarrhea. 

Nervous system: headache, dizziness, discomfort, twitching of muscles, 

ataxia seizures, loss of consciousness and difficulty in pronunciation. 

Respiratory system: cough, pain, difficulty of breathing and wheezing. 

  



25 
 

 
 

2.7.2 Pesticide residues 

Pesticide residues: The quantities or concentrations of pesticides that 

remain on the surface or inside agricultural and food products after using 

the pesticides. These concentrations vary according to the type of crop and 

the type of pesticide. Each pesticide has a pre-harvest interval "safety 

period". Whilst the pre-harvest interval: It is the minimum time duration, 

between the last time of application of a pesticide on the crop, and the time 

it can be harvested. That is, after a pesticide is applied to a crop, a specific 

number of days must pass before the fruit is harvested (Al-Dossary, 2018). 

Pesticides reach food by spraying crops with pesticides. They can be found 

in food products or on agricultural crops after harvesting or storage. There 

are maximum permissible limits in the food and agricultural products of 

these pesticides, and it varies from one pesticide to another and from a crop 

or food product to another (Al-Dossary, 2018). 

2.8 Common wrong practices when use, storage, transport and 

disposal of pesticides 

The most common farmer's wrong practices in Palestine are: Storage of 

pesticides in nearby the reach of children; Storage of pesticides in an open 

place without availability of means of prevention and protection; 

Uncertainty of the pesticide expiry date; Failure of the farmer to read the 

instructions written on the pesticide packaging or not to abide by them; 

Mixing several types of pesticides and chemicals with each other to reduce 



26 
 

 
 

time and cost; Do not wear personal protective equipment; Smoking during 

spraying; Use a pesticide amount that exceeds the limit; Spray in the 

opposite direction of the wind; Use of pesticides at inappropriate times; 

Use of pesticides even if the crop is not infected with diseases; Sometimes 

when spraying equipment becomes clogged, some farmers open the 

equipment with their mouths; The farmer does not bathe after using the 

pesticide; Improper disposal of empty pesticide containers after spraying 

such as (dumping them in sewers, burying them under the soil, burning 

them, throwing them on the edges of the field); and Failure to comply with 

the pre-harvest interval period (Sawalha, 2012). 

2.9 Main types of personal protective equipment 

 

Figure (2): Personal protective equipment. 

Personal 
protective 

equipment's 

Eye and 
face 

protection 

Respiratory 
protection 

Protective 
gloves 

Protective 
clothes 

Protective 
footwear 



27 
 

 
 

2.10 Pesticide alternatives 

Pesticide alternatives are considered striking changes in the field of plant 

protection from pests and human protection from the damage caused by 

chemical pesticide residues and environmental preservation from chemical 

pollutants in addition to reducing the costs of pest control and increasing 

crop production (Kandil, 2000). 

Advantages of pesticide alternatives, including: 

a) It is a biological compounds and natural materials that are not 

harmful to humans, plants, animals and the environment. 

b) Inexpensive compared to chemical pesticides. 

c) It begins to be used at levels less than the effect of chemical 

pesticides and early detection of effect, so spray can be repeated for 

best results.  

d) When using biological compounds, the farmer must be confident that 

the pest will not die immediately, but need the incubation period 

within it. 

e) The grace period after spraying and harvesting, is almost non-

existent. 

f) It is the safe and suitable method for culturally different levels in the 

field of pest control. 



28 
 

 
 

g) Repeated use leads to an increase in the natural enemies of pests, 

which reduces the use of chemical pesticides. 

h) Safety of the product and a guarantee for the source where the food 

is free from chemicals and preserves the environment from pollution. 

i) Increase national and individual output as a result of successful 

control. (Kandil, 2000). 

Examples of pesticides alternatives: 

Alternatives to pesticides are available and include methods of cultivation, 

use of biological pest controls (such as pheromones and microbial 

pesticides), genetic engineering, and methods of interfering with insect 

breeding (Miller, 2004). Application of composted yard waste has also 

been used as a way of controlling pests (Gallaher & McSorley, 1996). 

These methods are becoming increasingly popular and often are safer than 

traditional chemical pesticides. 

Cultivation practices include polyculture (growing multiple types of 

plants), crop rotation, planting crops in areas where the pests that damage 

them do not live, timing planting according to when pests will be least 

problematic, and use of trap crops that attract pests away from the real crop 

(Miller, 2004). Trap crops have successfully controlled pests in some 

commercial agricultural systems while reducing pesticide usage; (Shelton 

& Badenes-Pérez, 2006) however, in many other systems, trap crops 

can fail to reduce pest densities at a commercial scale, even when the 



29 
 

 
 

trap crop works in controlled experiments (Holden, Ellner, Lee, Nyrop, & 

Sanderson, 2012). 

Release of other organisms that fight the pest is another example of an 

alternative to pesticide use. These organisms can include natural predators 

or parasites of the pests. Biological pesticides based on entomopathogenic 

fungi, bacteria and viruses cause disease in the pest species can also be 

used (Miller, 2004). 

Interfering with insects' reproduction can be accomplished by sterilizing 

males of the target species and releasing them, so that they mate with 

females but do not produce offspring (Miller, 2004). This technique was 

first used on the screwworm fly in 1958 and has since been used with the 

medfly, the tsetse fly and the gypsy moth (Web Archive, 2007). However, 

this can be a costly, time consuming approach that only works on some 

types of insects. 

2.11 Statistics about pesticides use 

2.11.1 International statistics about pesticides use 

Figure (3) shows the increase of the total global pesticide production over 

the last decades. Production is measured in million tones here. 



30 
 

 
 

 
Figure (3): Total global pesticide production and global pesticide imports, 1940s-2000. 

Source: (Tilman, Cassman, Matson, Naylor, & Polasky, 2002). 

Figure (4) shows pesticide use, broken down by product type in the US (As 

an example). It is measured in tones of active ingredient. Throughout this 

entire period herbicides were the most commonly used pesticides. 

 

Figure (4): Pesticide production in US by type. 

Source: (Roser, 2019). 



31 
 

 
 

Also, Figure (5) shows the percentage of the pesticide used worldwide 

during (1990-2017). 

 

Figure (5): Percentage of pesticide use around the world. 

Source: (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2019). 

Moreover Figure (6) shows the percentage of the pesticide use by 

continent, (Average 1990 – 2017). 

 

Figure (6): Percentage of pesticide use by continent. 

Source: (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2019). 



32 
 

 
 

Figure (7) shows the percentage of the pesticide use for top 10 countries, 

(Average 1990 – 2017). 

 

Figure (7): Percentage of pesticide use for top 10 countries. 

Source: (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2019). 

2.11.2 Arab statistics about pesticides use 

Figure (8) shows the total pesticide use of some Arab countries. Total 

pesticide use measured in tones of pesticide consumption per year. 

 

Figure (8): Total pesticide use of some Arab countries. 

Source: (Roser, 2019). 



33 
 

 
 

Figure (9) shows pesticide use per hectare of cropland of some Arab 

countries. Average pesticide application per unit of cropland, measured in 

kilograms per hectare. 

 

Figure (9): Pesticide use per hectare of cropland of some Arab countries. 

Source: (Roser, 2019). 

Whereas Figure (10) shows pesticide breakdown by type, Jordan (As an 

example). Pesticide use, broken down by product type, measured in tones 

of active ingredient.  

 

Figure (10): Pesticide breakdown by type in Jordan. 
Source: (Roser, 2019). 



34 
 

 
 

2.11.3 Palestinian statistics about pesticides use 

Figure (11) shows the total pesticide use in Palestine. Total pesticide use 

measured in tones of pesticide consumption per year. 

 

Figure (11): Total pesticide use in Palestine. 

Source: (Roser, 2019). 

Figure (12) shows the total insecticide use in Palestine. Annual quantity of 

insecticides used in agriculture, measured as the tones of active ingredient 

per year. 

 

Figure (12): Total insecticide use in Palestine. 

Source: (Roser, 2019). 



35 
 

 
 

Also, Figure (13): shows the Pesticide use per hectare of cropland in 

Palestine. Average pesticide application per unit of cropland, measured in 

kilograms per hectare.  

 

Figure (13): Pesticide use per hectare of cropland in Palestine. 

Source: (Roser, 2019). 

As well as Figure (14) shows the pesticide breakdown by type in Palestine. 

Pesticide use, broken down by product type, measured in tones of active 

ingredient.   

 

Figure (14): Pesticide breakdown by type in Palestine. 

Source: (Roser, 2019). 



36 
 

 
 

B. Literature review 

Literature shed the light on the subject of knowledge about pesticide and 

applying safety practices among farmers. It includes reading and reviewing 

documentation and information from different sources, such as Palestinian 

ministry of agriculture, annual reports from the different organizations, 

several interviews were held with experts in the field of agriculture, 

previous literature, thesis, reports, published papers, etc. Moreover, the 

researcher depends on primary sources for collecting data, that was written 

by the original researchers.  

These literatures are: 

o A Guide to pesticide regulation in California: 

This guide contains information on pesticide laws and regulations, DPR’s 

organizational structure, an explanation of regulatory and registration 

processes, a description of local and state enforcement activities, and 

details on DPR initiatives to protect people and the environment (California 

Department of Pesticide Regulation "DPR", 2017). 

o A case study of health risk estimates for pesticide-users of fruits and 

vegetable farmers in Cameroon: 

It aimed to assess the health risks of vegetable farmers to pesticide users in 

Cameroon.  The main objective of the study was to investigate the health 

risk due to pesticide use by small scale independent vegetable farmers and 

fruits farmers employed under multinational cooperation in Cameroon. The 



37 
 

 
 

main types of vegetables and fruits produced in Cameroon, the percentage 

of farmers using chemical pesticides and the frequency and dosage of 

pesticides use were also investigated. The types, source of pesticides used 

and method of application of the available pesticides as compared to the 

recommended standard methods were equally analyzed. Finally, common 

illnesses in the area which may be related to the use of pesticides were also 

analyzed. It pointed out that there is a significant proportion of farmers and 

workers at risk of health problems resulting from the use of pesticides. 

Majority of the farmers don’t use body covering, eye protection, head 

covers or nose masks to protect themselves when spraying pesticides. Some 

farmers even eat, smoke or drink during spraying exposing themselves to 

hazards. Some farmers use pesticides meant for cocoa, coffee or cotton to 

spray garden crops and others mix insecticides and fungicides to spray 

against insects even in the absence of a fungi infection (Amuoh, 2011). 

o Misuse of pesticides by vegetable farmers in Palestinian territories 

and recommendations for their proper use: 

It was conducted to study the misuse of pesticides in Nablus, Tulkarm and 

Jenin districts. The results have revealed that up to 50% of farmers usually 

do not read the directions on the labels of pesticide containers. Some of 

them (20-36%) also dispose of the empty pesticide containers by throwing 

them in fields or leaving them in corners or near the field hedges. They 

burn empty fiber and paper containers of pesticides including those of 

herbicide and they may often not keep enough safe distance from the 



38 
 

 
 

smoke. Some of the farmers (2-21%) recklessly open containers or pour 

into the spraying apparatus, as well as spray the pesticides in windy days. 

Also, 51% of the pesticides available in the Palestinian markets have 

Hebrew illustration. Furthermore, up to 61% of the farmers ignore the 

official recommendations of the agricultural extension service. The results 

showed that most farmers (87-91%) ignore the necessity of wearing the 

appropriate protective clothing. Furthermore, 80-85% of them do not 

accurately measure the application rate of pesticides using the proper 

equipment. Other form of misuse of pesticides is that many farmers (31-

41%) expose themselves to the pesticides, sometimes using their mouths to 

blow out clogged lines and nozzles. Also, 80% of the farmers whose fields 

are located beside water canals spray herbicides to control the wild 

vegetation around them. Above all, most farmers (up to 95%) never 

precisely observe the safety periods specified between the applications of 

the pesticides and the harvesting period or reentry time (Sawalha, 2012). 

o Health risk among pesticide sellers in Bamenda (Cameroon) and 

peripheral Areas: 

This study aimed to evaluate the health risk among pesticide sellers as a 

resulting due to exposure to pesticide Thirty-two questionnaires were 

administered to 32 pesticide sellers systematically selected, and chi square 

was used for statistical analysis. From each shop, a respondent was chosen 

among the workers according to its daily time spent in the workplace. The 

results showed that there is similarity between sellers in Bamenda and 



39 
 

 
 

peripheral area; one active ingredient (metalaxyl) and one formulation 

(beauchamp) sold are not registered; throat irritation, headaches, fatigue, 

skin irritation, eye irritation, and difficulty in breathing with more cases of 

nose irritation were symptoms observed; pesticides are stored either in the 

shops or in warehouses; safety measures generally applied are sitting 

outside the shop, taking medicated charcoal and the use of protective 

clothing; 56% have experience less than 5 years. Permanent pesticide 

sellers are then exposed to chronic intoxication in Bamenda and 

neighboring zones (Sonchieu, Akono, Ngwamitang, & Ngassoum, 2018). 

o Assessing knowledge of perceived health risk posed by agricultural 

pesticides among farmers in Ikenne local government area Ogun 

state Nigeria: 

The purpose of this study is to assess level of farmers' awareness about the 

health risks associated with pesticide use and misuse. The result showed 

that preventive measures by farmers, including wearing of protective gears 

while applying pesticides to farmland was common place. It was also found 

that pesticide disposal practice was poor among farmers, however, farmers 

practice hand washing, change of clothes and showering after application. 

Health risk perception was found to be moderate and it was suggested that 

the reason for the lack of preventive practices and use of protective gear 

was as a result of low perceived seriousness of the health hazard posed by 

pesticides. It is hence recommended that farmers should be trained on 

health hazard of pesticide use and supply of protective gears should be 

made available at subsidized rate (Gibson, et al., 2017). 



40 
 

 
 

o Agricultural pesticides and its effects upon health In Gaza 

governorates: 

The study dealt with agricultural pesticides and their impact on health in 

the Gaza governorates. It highlighted on the reality of the pesticides, their 

quantities and types during the year 2014 and compared to previous years, 

as well as clarified the sources of pollution of the environment with 

pesticides, and the reasons for their deployment by identifying farms for 

reasons of deployment where the researcher distributing (501) the 

identification of the composed of farmers from several areas in which 

spotted the problems and consequences of the excessive use of agricultural 

pesticides and its dangers on the farm's health and the health of citizens and 

the statement of the effect of some of the pesticides used in the provinces 

of Gaza, as the study on the impact of hormones plant, as well as the 

impact of pesticides on the environment of soil, water and air and the 

enemies of vitality and Wildlife and its impact on the food, and also study 

examined pesticide residues in breast milk and blood plasma arose 

researcher to monitor pesticide residues them, as well as agricultural 

products  (exported and imported and domestic) (Alatawna, 2014). 

o Farmers' knowledge, practices and injuries associated with pesticide 

exposure in rural farming villages in Tanzania: 

The objective of this study was to describe the exposure of farmers to 

pesticides, knowledge about pesticide risks, the experience of previous 

poisoning, and hazardous practices that may lead to acute poisoning. 



41 
 

 
 

Insecure practices for pesticide handling was assessed through pesticide 

storage monitoring, PPE conditions and through self-reports for pesticide 

disposal and calibration equipment. The study found a high potential for 

exposure to pesticides in the selected community in Tanzania's rural areas, 

a high percentage of acute self-reported pesticide poisoning and poor 

registration in hospital records (Lekei, Ngowi, & London, 2014). 

o Farmer’s knowledge, attitudes and practices, and their exposure to 

pesticide residues after application on the vegetable and fruit crops in 

North of Delta, Egypt: 

The aim of this study is to assess farmers' awareness of the safe use of 

pesticides and field spraying practices that may potentially expose them to 

chemical hazards. The study was carried out among smallholder farmers of 

intensive vegetable and fruit production zones at northern delta, Egypt. 

Data was based on a random sample of 86 farmers using structured 

interviews and direct field observations. The obtained results showed that 

in spite of the farmers have good knowledge about the potential negative 

effects of pesticides on the human and for somewhat on the environment, 

lack of their following safety measures was dominant (Abbassy, 2017).  

o Pesticide Knowledge and Safety Practices among Farm Workers in 

Kuwait: Results of a Survey: 

The aim of this study was to assess the levels of knowledge, attitude and 

practices of Kuwaiti farmers regarding the safe use of pesticides. A total of 



42 
 

 
 

250 farmers participated in this study through in-depth interviews and 

observations on-farm. The majority of the farmers acknowledged that 

pesticides were harmful to their health (71%) and the environment (65%). 

However, farmers’ level of knowledge of pesticide safety is insufficient. 

Over 70% of the farmers did not read or follow pesticide label instructions, 

and 58% did not use any personal protective equipment (PPE) when 

handling pesticides (Jallow, Awadh , Albaho, Devi, & Thomas, 2017). 

 

  



43 
 

 
 

Chapter Three 

Methodology 

3.1 Research design 

This research is followed a descriptive, non-experimental research design.  

Whereas a descriptive research aims to accurately and systematically 

describe a population, situation or phenomenon. It can answer what, when, 

where, and how questions, but not why questions. To determine cause and 

effect, experimental research is required. A descriptive research design can 

use a wide variety of quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate 

one or more variables. Unlike in experimental research, the researcher does 

not control or manipulate any of the variables, but only observes and 

measures them (McCombes, 2019).  

3.2 Inclusion & Exclusion criteria 

3.2.1 Inclusion criteria 

 All farmers, who are living in Tulkarm governorate, and available at 

the study period. 

  Small or big size farm owner. 

 The farmers who were interviewed during the pilot study.  

 



44 
 

 
 

3.2.2 Exclusion criteria 

 Farmers who are none available at the time of data collection.  

 Farmers who refuse participation. 

3.3 Study population 

The target population of this study is all farmers in Tulkarm governorate. 

The total number of farmers in Tulkarm governorate was 3900 according to 

the Palestinian Ministry of Agriculture.  

3.4 Study period 

The study was performed from March 2019 to March 2020. 

3.5 Sampling technique and sample size 

The sample size was 350 farmers from Tulkarm governorate. The number 

of samples was measured by Sample Size Calculator (see annex 8). Which 

helps to determine the ideal sample size. 

Sampling was simple random method; in which each individual was chosen 

randomly and entirely by chance, such that each individual had the same 

probability of being chosen at any stage during the sampling process. 

3.6 Study tool 

A questionnaire was distributed to farmers who illegible to the study 

criteria. The questionnaire included questions about (level of knowledge in 



45 
 

 
 

pesticide, applied safety practices when dealing with pesticide, practices 

regarding, handling, disposal and storage of pesticides, and the obstacles 

faced by farmers) (see annex 9). 

3.7 Response rate 

The number of respondents was 350 (represents 100%). 

3.8 Construction of questionnaire 

A questionnaire was designed to assess the levels of knowledge of the safe 

use of pesticides and safety practices applied by farmers in Tulkarem 

governorate.  It was reviewed and validated by the supervisors, designed in 

English and translated into Arabic, the national language understood by 

farmers. The questionnaire included closed and open-ended questions and 

was pre-tested by randomly interviewing 135 farmers included in this 

study. The closed questions were in a multiple-choice format. Farmers had 

to select only the appropriate answer or answers that they thought will 

describe their opinion on a particular issue.  

The questionnaire contained eight main sections. Each section was 

designed to collect information on a particular issue related to the safe use 

of pesticides as the following: 

- The 1
st
 part included items related to the social characteristics of the 

farmer.  

- The 2
nd

 part included items related to the characteristics of 

agricultural land. 



46 
 

 
 

- The 3
rd

 part included items related to farmer knowledge of pesticide 

use. 

- The 4
th
 part included items related to farmers knowledge of health 

and safety measures during the use of pesticides. 

- The 5
th
 part included items related to the health effects of pesticide 

use. 

- The 6
th
 part included items related to the storage of pesticides. 

- The 7
th
 part included items related to the environmental effects of 

pesticide use. 

- The 8
th
 part included items related to obstacles and suggestions. 

3.9 Validity of questionnaire 

 3.9.1 Face validity 

It is designed to make people more responsive to the questionnaire; the 

researcher checked the face validity twice. The first check was through 8 

expert persons from An-Najah National University and the Ministry of 

Agriculture who gave their suggestions and judgment about the 

questionnaire’s adequacy. The second check was during the pilot study, as 

the included participants were asked about the structure of the questions, its 

shape, and typo-free. 

 



47 
 

 
 

3.9.2 Content validity 

It was done before data collection. The questionnaire was sent to 7 experts 

(annex 10) with a covering letter and the instructions about the study, 

overall aim, objective, field of the study, and other relevant information. 

The experts were asked to evaluate and revise the questionnaire’s relevance 

to the study, clarity, and completeness of each section. Feedback was 

obtained from experts, and modification was done with the researcher 

supervisors, where their opinions were considered. The questionnaire was 

translated to Arabic by the researcher and assessed by an Arabic language 

expert who gave advice and modifications. 

3.10 Pre-test of the questionnaire 

A Pre-study was conducted on 10% of the sample. 35 participants were 

included as a pilot study group to ensure the questions are clear and avoid 

questions length & ambiguity. The pilot study group included farmers form 

different age groups, gender, educational levels, and residency status. All 

of them were provided with a clear explanation about the study and its 

objectives before application, to ask them about difficulties and their 

opinion of the questionnaire. The results of the pilot study were very 

helpful in modifying the tools. 

3.11 Reliability of questionnaire 

The Reliability of an instrument is the degree of consistency with which it 

measures the attribute it is supposed to measure. The reliability of an 



48 
 

 
 

instrument was done by computing Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient. Whereas 

Cronbach's alpha is the most common measure of reliability (for most 

purposes, reliability coefficient above 0.7 is considered satisfactory); it was 

done using SPSS program. The results ranged from 0.822 and 0.910 and 

the general reliability for all items is equal to 0.855. This range is 

considered very well, and indicated high reliability of the questionnaire. 

3.12 Data collection 

Data was collected by the researcher through face-to-face farmers’ 

interview. The interview was started by giving the farmers complete 

instructions and explanations about the study and its objectives and the 

importance of providing reliable answers. The interview was done at an 

appropriate time, taking all ethical considerations.  

3.13 Data entry and analysis 

Excel software program was used for data entry. 

The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences 

(SPSS) programs, with the assistance of a statistician. 

Frequency tables for the study variable were conducted. 

3.14 Ethical consideration 

Approval letters were taken from An-Najah National University, and the 

Palestinian Ministry of Agriculture; as well as consent was taken from each 

participated farmer. 



49 
 

 
 

An explanatory letter was attached to the questionnaire and provided to the 

participants, which include the study title, objectives and other information 

needed to make clarification to the participants. 

The researcher gave the participants the right to participate or not, and 

ensure confidentiality (anonymity was maintained into the explanatory 

letter). 

Respect all personal beliefs. Moreover, choose the right place to collect 

information according to farmers’ convenience. 

3.15 Limitation of the study 

The researcher faced some challenges during the time course of data 

collection and questionnaire preparation, which illustrated as; 

- Lack of information, insufficient and inappropriate data registry.  

- Lack of previous studies in the research area. 

- Time limitations.  

- Lack of financial funding for the study. 

The prevailing political situation in the area which limited movements and 

makes difficulties in research studies due to barriers and check-points. And, 

difficulty of transportation. 

 

  



50 
 

 
 

Chapter Four 

Results and discussions 

This chapter points out the results and discussion of the study, including 

descriptive analysis that presents the socio-demographic data of the study 

and the answers to the questions of the study. The researcher used 

representative samples of 350 farmers from the study area. 

The response rate was 100%. The researcher used proper statistical 

software, including frequencies and percentage. Appropriate statistical tests 

such as Chi-Square test were used. Characteristics of study participants are 

demonstrated below:  

A. Descriptive part 

Analysis of the study questions 

A.4.1. Personal characteristics of the farmers 

The results revealed that the gender distribution of the participants reflects 

higher males prevalence than females. Figure (15) showed the distribution 

of study participants by gender; it is shown that 71 participants were 

female, which represents 21% of total participants, and 279 participants 

were males and represent 79%. 



51 
 

 
 

 

Figure (15): Distribution of study participants by gender. 

While Figure (16) described the distribution of study participants by age 

group; it shows that 25 participants were less than 20 years old, which 

represents 7.1% of total participants; 64 participants (18.3%) their age 

group was from (21-30) years; 107 participants (30.6%) their age group 

was from (31-40) years; 125 participants (35.7%) their age group was from 

(41-60) years, and 29 participants (8.3%) were more than 61 years. 

 

Figure (16): Distribution of study participants by age group. 

279 

71 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Male (79%). Female (21%)

Gender

25 

64 

107 

125 

29 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Less than 20
(7.1%)

From (21 - 30)
(18.3%)

From (31 - 40)
(30.6%)

From (41 - 60)
(35.7%)

More than 61
(8.3%)

Age group



52 
 

 
 

Also, Figure (17) describes the distribution of study participants by marital 

status; it shows that 104 participants were single which represents 29.71% 

of total participants; 221 participants (63.14%) were married; 14 

participants (4%) are divorced, and 11 participants (3.14%) were 

widow/widower. 

 

Figure (17): Distribution of study participants by marital status. 

Figure (18) described the distribution of study participants by their 

educational level. It showed that 72 participants their educational level was 

less than high school, representing 20.6% of total participants. While 95 

participants (27.1%) their educational level was high school; 69 

participants (19.7%) their educational level was diploma; 94 participants 

(26.9%) their educational level was a bachelor; 18 participants (5.1%) their 

educational level was master, and 2 participants (0.6%) their educational 

level was doctorate. 

104 

221 

14 11 
0

50

100

150

200

250

Marital status

Fr
e

q
u

e
n

cy
 Single (29.71%)

Married (63.14%)

Divorced (4%)

Widow (3.14%)



53 
 

 
 

 

Figure (18): Distribution of study participants by educational level. 

The distribution of study participants by current work, was analyzed to 

determine if the farmer is a full-time farm worker or has another job. Table 

(1) showed that 256 participants worked only in agriculture, representing 

73.1% of total participants. While 69 participants (19.7%) were employees 

in the government, private sector or civil or international organizations. 

Besides 46 participants (13.1%) were working inside the green line; 85 

participants (24.3%) were working in the free business; 18 participants 

(5.1%) were retired; 41 participants (11.7%) were house wives; finally, 49 

participants (14%) were students. 

 

 

 

 

72 

95 

69 

94 

18 
2 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Less than high
school (20.6)

High school
(27.1)

Diploma (19.7) Bachelor (26.9) Master (5.1) Doctorate (0.6)

FR
EQ

U
EN

C
Y 



54 
 

 
 

Table (1): Distribution of study participants by current work 

Item Frequency Percentage 

Current work (a full-time farm worker or having another job) 

Full time for agricultural work only: 

Yes 256 73.1 

No 94 26.9 

Total 350 100 

Employee (government, private sector or 

civil or international organizations): 

Yes 69 19.7 

No 281 80.3 

Total 350 100 

Work inside the green line: 

Yes 46 13.1 

No 304 86.9 

Total 350 100 

Free business: 

Yes 85 24.3 

No 265 75.7 

Total 350 100 

Retired: 

Yes 18 5.1 

No 332 94.9 

Total 350 100 

House wife: 

Yes 41 11.7 

No 309 88.3 

Total 350 100 

Student: 

Yes 49 14 

No 301 86 

Total 350 100 

Table (2) described the distribution of study participants by the number of 

family members. The number of family members ranged between (2 to 17) 

members. Moreover, it describes the distribution of study participants by 

the number of workers in agriculture, whether male or female. All 

characteristics of the number of family members are demonstrated in this 

table. 

  



55 
 

 
 

Table (2): Distribution of study participants by family members 

Item Frequency Percentage 

Number of family members. 

2 17 4.86 

3 22 6.29 

4 31 8.86 

5 65 18.57 

6 64 18.29 

7 66 18.86 

8 51 14.57 

9 12 3.43 

10 15 4.29 

11 4 1.14 

12 1 0.29 

13 1 0.29 

17 1 0.29 

Total 350 100 

Number of workers in agriculture: 

(males). 

0 50 14.29 

1 93 26.57 

2 119 34 

3 62 17.71 

4 15 4.29 

5 7 2 

6 1 0.29 

8 1 0.29 

9 1 0.29 

11 1 0.29 

Total 350 100 

Number of workers in agriculture: 

(females). 

0 229 65.4 

1 87 24.9 

2 24 6.9 

3 5 1.4 

4 4 1.1 

7 1 0.3 

Total 350 100 

A.4.2 Distribution of study participants by agricultural land 

characteristics 

When characterizing the study participants by agricultural land ownership; 

Figure (19) showed that 257 participants owned agricultural land, 



56 
 

 
 

representing (73.43%) of the total sample; 60 participants (17.14%) rented 

the agricultural land; 28 participants (8%) guaranteed the agriculture land, 

and 5 participants (1.43%) are quotas the agricultural land. 

 

Figure (19): Distribution of study participants by land ownership. 

The distribution of study participants by the total area of agricultural land is 

studied. It shows differences in the area of agricultural land among the 

participants. As the largest area was 14 donums, and the smallest area was 

40 m
2
. Details of agricultural areas are shown in table (3).  

  

257 

60 

28 

5 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Land Ownership:

FR
EQ

U
EN

C
Y
 

Owned (73.43%) Rented (17.14%) Guaranteed (8%) Quotas (1.43%)



57 
 

 
 

Table (3): Distribution of study participants by total area of 

agricultural land 

Item Frequency Percent 

Total area of agricultural land: 

1 Donum 20 5.71 

1.5 Donums 28 8 

10 Donums 29 8.29 

100 meters 1 0.29 

112 Meters 1 0.29 

12 Donums 10 2.86 

14 Donums 1 0.29 

2 Donums 1 0.29 

2 Donums 52 14.86 

2.5 Donums 4 1.14 

3 Donums 43 12.29 

3.5 Donums 1 0.29 

300 Meters 1 0.29 

4 Donums 1 0.29 

4 Donums 33 9.43 

40 Meters 1 0.29 

400 Meters 1 0.29 

5 Donums 54 15.43 

50 Meters 1 0.29 

6 Donums 26 7.43 

600 Meters 1 0.29 

7 Donums 16 4.57 

700 Meters 1 0.29 

8 Donums 22 6.29 

9 Donums 1 0.29 

Total 350 100 

Table (4) described the distribution of study participants by the area of 

agricultural land currently used. It showed differences in the area of 

agricultural land "currently used" among the participants. As the largest 

area "currently used" was 14 donums, and the smallest was 40 meters. 

Also, all details about the agricultural areas "currently used" are described 

in table (4).  



58 
 

 
 

Table (4): Distribution of study participants by the area of agricultural 

land currently used 

Item Frequency Percent 

The area of agricultural land currently 

used by farmers: 

1 Donum 31 8.86 

1.5 Donum 28 8 

10 Donum 25 7.14 

100 meters 1 0.29 

112 Meters 1 0.29 

12 Donum 6 1.71 

14 Donum 1 0.29 

2 Donum 62 17.71 

2.5 Donum 5 1.43 

200 Meters 1 0.29 

3 Donum 41 11.71 

3.5 Donum 1 0.29 

300 Meters 2 0.57 

4 Donum 30 8.57 

40 Meters 1 0.29 

4Donum 1 0.29 

5 Donum 1 0.29 

5 Donum 45 12.86 

50 Meters 3 0.86 

500 Meters 1 0.29 

6 Donum 23 6.57 

7 Donum 13 3.71 

700 Meters 2 0.57 

8 Donum 22 6.29 

800 Meters 2 0.57 

9 Donum 1 0.29 

Total 350 100 

Table (5) showed the distribution of study participants by studied area 

locations. 94 participants were living in Al Sha'rawiya, representing 

(26.86%) of the total sample; 80 participants (22.86%) were living in Al-

Kafriyat; 93 participants (26.57%) were living in Wadi Alshaeir, and 83 

participants (23.71%) were living in Tulkarem city and its suburbs. Among 

the participants, 194 participants are applying non-protective agricultural 



59 
 

 
 

patterns (open field) representing (55.4%) of the total sample. While 41 

participants (11.7%) are applying protected agriculture system 

(greenhouses); and 115 participants (32.9%) their agricultural land was 

mixed of open field and greenhouses. Also, it showed the number of 

workers in the agricultural land, and it ranged from (1 to 15) workers. 

Table (5): Distribution of study participants by studied area locations 

Locations Frequency Percent 

Living area: 

Al Sha'rawiya 94 26.86 

Al-Kafriyat 80 22.86 

Wadi Alshaeir 93 26.57 

Tulkarem city 

and its suburbs. 
83 23.71 

Total 350 100 

Agriculture land: 

Open 194 55.4 

Greenhouses 41 11.7 

Open and 

Greenhouses 
115 32.9 

Total 350 100 

Number of workers in the 

agricultural land: 

1 66 18.86 

2 108 30.86 

3 72 20.57 

4 65 18.57 

5 24 6.86 

6 6 1.71 

7 2 0.57 

8 2 0.57 

9 1 0.29 

10 2 0.57 

12 1 0.29 

15 1 0.29 

Total 350 100 

Is the agricultural labor force on the 

farm trained, qualified, and have 

sufficient experience to work on the 

farm? 

Yes 210 60 

No 140 40 

Total 350 100 

 



60 
 

 
 

The study findings revealed that the dominant cultivated plant species were 

tomatoes. In contrast, the least cultivated species were apple, Cantaloupe, 

Carob, Garlic, Lentil, Mango, Nut, Pomegranate, Rocca, and Watermelon 

(see Table 6).  

Table (6): Distribution of study participants by the types of crops they 

grow in their lands 

Item Frequency (Number of farmers) Percent 

Tomato 127 36.29 

Cucumber 117 33.43 

Olive 110 31.43 

Various vegetables 56 16 

Cauliflower 55 15.71 

Beans 42 12 

Pepper 40 11.43 

Almonds 34 9.71 

Zucchini 32 9.14 

Citrus 30 8.57 

Corchorus olitorius 29 8.29 

Aubergine 28 8 

Guava 26 7.43 

Thyme 26 7.43 

Peas 19 5.43 

Lemon 17 4.86 

Okra 16 4.57 

Potato 16 4.57 

Beans 15 4.29 

Onions 14 4 

Cabbage 13 3.71 

Wheat 13 3.71 

Avocado 13 3.43 

Grape 10 2.86 

Parsley 10 2.86 

Louse 9 2.57 

Fruitful trees 8 2.29 

Lettuce 8 2.29 

Orange 8 2.29 

Barley 7 2 

Figs 6 1.71 



61 
 

 
 

Item Frequency (Number of farmers) Percent 

Sage 6 1.71 

Cherries 5 1.43 

Chickpeas 5 1.43 

Radish 5 1.43 

Spinach 5 1.43 

Capsicum 4 1.14 

Corn 3 0.86 

Fruits 3 0.86 

Legumes 3 0.86 

Blueberry 2 0.57 

Cereal 2 0.57 

Mint 2 0.57 

Peaches 2 0.57 

An apple 1 0.29 

Cantaloupe 1 0.29 

Carob 1 0.29 

Garlic 1 0.29 

Lentil 1 0.29 

Mango 1 0.29 

Nut 1 0.29 

Pomegranate 1 0.29 

Rocca 1 0.29 

Watermelon 1 0.29 

The study results revealed that the farmers' majority (71%) in the studied 

area are facing agricultural related problems table (7). The highest area that 

had agricultural problems were Al Sha'rawiya and Wadi Alshaeir, while the 

lowest were the Al-Kafriyat. These problems are diverse and found all over 

the value chain, some are caused by crop diseases and pests, poor 

marketing, high input and production costs. In addition to climate change-

related problems; for instance, the rain precipitation delaying and 

distribution, and deterioration of soil fertility. On the other hand, 101 

participants (28.9%) claimed that they did not face any agricultural 

problems. 



62 
 

 
 

Table (7): Distribution of study participants by agricultural problems 

Item Frequency Percent 

Are you facing agricultural 

problems? 

Yes 249 71.1 

No 101 28.9 

Total 350 100 

Area of agricultural problems Al Sha'rawiya 70 20 

Al-Kafriyat 54 15.4 

Wadi Alshaeir 69 19.7 

Tulkarem city and 

its suburbs. 

56 16 

The answer is no. 101 28.9 

Total 350 100 

If yes, what are the problems? 

Various crops diseases.  133 38 

Poor marketing.  48 13.71 

The spread of agricultural pests.  19 5.43 

Lack of labor.  16 4.57 

High costs of purchasing supplies and 

low selling prices of the product.  15 4.29 

Little or no water.  13 3.71 

Weather conditions.  8 2.29 

The spread of pigs.  7 2 

Lack of agricultural expertise.  7 2 

High prices of pesticides.  4 1.14 

The use of pesticides does not give a 

result.  3 0.86 

Agricultural area is small.  3 0.86 

Fluctuation or lack of production.  4 1.14 

Spread of the mole.  2 0.57 

Absence of agricultural extension 

campaigns.  2 0.57 

Weeds growth among crops.  2 0.57 

The price of seedlings is high.  1 0.29 

Difficulty in providing the tools 

necessary for agriculture.  1 0.29 

Lack of tools for agriculture.  1 0.29 

Difficulty in providing fertilizers.  1 0.29 

The growth of a large number of agar 

oak between the olive trees.  1 0.29 

Agricultural institutions are not 

interested in agricultural matters.  1 0.29 

The workers are not specialized in 

agriculture.  1 0.29 

The absence of financial support.  1 0.29 

Lack of rain.  1 0.29 

Decreased soil fertility.  1 0.29 



63 
 

 
 

Regarding agricultural extension services, Table (8) showed the 

distribution of study participants by agricultural extension services they 

received. It indicated that the majority of participants had agricultural 

extension services office in their area (n=224, represent (64%) from total 

participants). The highest area that had agricultural extension services 

office were Wadi Alshaeir, while the lowest were the Al-Kafriyat. 

Moreover, 174 participants reported that the agricultural extension services 

were available through the government; 113 participants mentioned that the 

agricultural extension services were available through the non-

governmental institutions; 110 participants mentioned that the agricultural 

extension services were available through the private sector or companies. 

While 3 participants stated that the agricultural extension services were 

available through the personal experience; and 1 participant said that the 

agricultural extension services were available through the agricultural 

supplies stores. In addition, 126 participants (36%) did not have 

agricultural extension services office in their area. 

  



64 
 

 
 

Table (8): Distribution of study participants by agricultural extension 

services in the studied area 

Item Frequency Percent 

Is there an agricultural extension 

services office in your area? 

Yes 224 64 

No 126 36 

Total 350 100 

If yes: 

Area of agricultural extension 

services: 

Al Sha'rawiya 48 13.7 

Al-Kafriyat 43 12.3 

Wadi Alshaeir 71 20.3 

Tulkarem city and its 

suburbs. 

62 17.7 

The answer is no. 126 36 

Total 350 100 

Is agricultural extension available 

through the government? 

Yes 174 49.7 

No 50 14.3 

The answer is no. 126 36 

Total 350 100 

Is agricultural extension available 

through civil institutions? 

Yes 113 32.3 

No 111 31.7 

The answer is no. 126 36 

Total 350 100 

Is agricultural extension available 

through a private sector or 

companies? 

Yes 110 31.4 

No 114 32.6 

The answer is no. 126 36 

Total 350 100 

From other sources, specify: Personal experience. 3 0.86 

Shops of agricultural 

tools. 

1 0.29 

Figure (20) described the distribution of study participants according to 

Agri-proficiently personnel's availability to supervise the farm. It shows 

that 254 participants did not have an agricultural engineer or agricultural 

technician to run their farm, representing 72.6% of the total sample. In 

comparison, 96 participants (27.4%) have an agricultural engineer or 

agricultural technician to supervise their farm. 



65 
 

 
 

 

Figure (20): Distribution of study participants by Agri-proficienal personnel's the 

farm. 

A.4.3. Distribution of study participants by their knowledge about the 

principles of pesticide use 

Table (9) showed that the majority of participants (n=336, which represent 

96% of the total studied sample) were using pesticides in their agricultural 

land, while 14 participants (4%) did not use the pesticides at all. 

Regarding the type of used pesticides used, the study findings revealed that 

the highly used type of these pesticides was Imidacloprid (Confidor®, 

Bayer). The other used pesticides were listed below in table (9). 

 

 

  

96 

254 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Yes (27.4%) No (72.6%)

Is there an agricultural engineer or agricultural technician supervising the farm?



66 
 

 
 

Table (9): Distribution of study participants by use pesticides in 

agricultural land 

Item Frequency Percent 

Do you use pesticides in agricultural land? 

Yes 336 96 

No 14 4 

Total 350 100 

If yes, mention the names of these pesticides: 

Imidacloprid (Confidor®, Bayer).  108 30.86 

Dimethoate (Rogor®, Cheminova).  73 20.86 

Chlorpyrifos (Dorsban®, Dow Agrosciences).  70 20 

Triadimenol (Bayfidan®, Lied chemical).  68 19.43 

Difenoconazole (Score®, Syngenta).  43 12.29 

Glyphosate Isopropy Amine Salt (Taifun®, Tabozal).  41 11.71 

Lambda Cyhalothrin (kung fu®, Syngenta).  34 9.71 

Lufenuron (Match®, Syngenta).  31 8.86 

Various herbicides.  31 8.86 

Various insecticides.  22 6.29 

Various pesticides as needed.  22 6.29 

Various fungicides.  16 4.57 

Bromopropylate (Neron®, Miron).  11 3.14 

Glyphosate isopropy amine salt (Roundup®, 

Monsanto). 

 

8 2.29 

Oxyfluorfen (Goal®, Dow Agrosciense).  7 2 

Farmer does not know the name.  7 2 

Triadimenol (Bayfidan®, Lied chemical).  6 1.71 

Dinotefuran (Ipon®, Mitsui chemicals inc).  5 1.43 

Mineral Oil (Citrole®, Total Solvents).  5 1.43 

Abamectin (Vertimec®, Syngenta).  5 1.43 

Diquat (Reglone®, Syngenta).  5 1.43 

Penconazole (Ofir 2000®, Syngenta).  4 1.14 

Novaluron (Rimon®, Makhteshim chemical works 

Ltd.).. 

 

3 0.86 

Copper hydroxide (Kocide®, DUPONT).  3 0.86 

Imidacloprid (Kohinor®, Lied Chemical).  3 0.86 

Propanocarp HCL (Dynone®, Bayer).  3 0.86 

2,4-D (Albur super®, Makhteshim).  2 0.57 

Deltamethrin (Decis®, Bayer crop seince).  2 0.57 

Pyraclostrobin   + Boscalid (Signum®, BASF).  2 0.57 

Various acaricides.  2 0.57 

Dimethomorph + Mancozeb (Acrobat®, BASF).  2 0.57 

Mancozeb (Manzidan®, DOW AGROSCIENCES).  2 0.57 

Mefenoxam + Mancozeb (Ridomil®, Syngenta).  2 0.57 

Cypermethrin (Siperin®, Rimi Chemicals ltd).  2 0.57 

(Avira ®, Lead Crop Science Pvt. Ltd.).  1 0.29 

Azoxystrobin (Amistar®, Syngenta).  1 0.29 

Copper hydroxide (Champion®, Nufarm).  1 0.29 



67 
 

 
 

Tolclofos-methyl (Teramac®, Twiga Chemical 

Industries Ltd). 

 

1 0.29 

Propamocarp HCL (Dotan®, Chimac Agriphar).  1 0.29 

Summer oil (Virol®, Makhteshim chemical works 

Ltd.). 

 

1 0.29 

Sulpher (Sulpher®, Agrindustria).  1 0.29 

Copper Sulphate (Copper Sulphate®, Amia).  1 0.29 

Dichloropropene (Kandor®, Dow Agrosciences).  1 0.29 

Copper hydroxide (Kocide®, DUPONT).  1 0.29 

Various copper pesticides.  1 0.29 

Fenamiphos (Neemacor®, Bayer).  1 0.29 

Thiocyclam hydrogen oxalate (Evisect®,  

Arysta lifscience co.). 

 

1 0.29 

Glyphosate Isopropy Amine Salt (Glyphos®, 

Luxembourg Chemical). 

 

1 0.29 

Chlorpyrifos (Dorbas®, Makhteshim Chemical 

Works Ltd.). 

 

1 0.29 

Abamectin (Romacten®, Rotam HK).  1 0.29 

Triadimenol (Shavit®, chemical works Ltd.).  1 0.29 

Lambda Cyhalothrin (Karate®, Syngenta).  1 0.29 

Table (10) showed that 88% of participants (n=308) said that the use of 

pesticides was decided by the men; while 8% of participants (n=28) 

mentioned that the use of pesticides was decided by the women. 

Regarding to the length of experience with using pesticides, it ranged 

between 4 months and 40 years table (10). Additionally, the result revealed 

that 128 participants are using pesticides continuously, which represent 

36.6% from total sample; while 116 participants (33.1%) used pesticides 

occasionally; and 92 participants (26.3%) used pesticides in cases of 

necessity. 

  



68 
 

 
 

Table (10): Distribution of study participants by making decision of 

related pesticides to use 

Item  Frequency Percent 

Who decides to use pesticides? 

The man 308 88 

The woman 28 8 

The answer is no 14 4 

Total 350 100 

How long have you been using 

pesticide " length of experience with 

using pesticides"? 

I don’t know 65 18.57 

1 Year 6 1.71 

10 Months 1 0.29 

10 Years 66 18.86 

12 Years 4 1.14 

13 Years 1 0.29 

14 Years 1 0.29 

15 Years 20 5.71 

17 Years 1 0.29 

19 Years 5 1.43 

2 Years 18 5.14 

20 Years 14 4 

29 Years 7 2 

3 Years 26 7.43 

30 Years 7 2 

4 Months 1 0.29 

40 Years 16 4.57 

5 Years 49 14 

6 Months 1 0.29 

6 Years 8 2.29 

7 Years 14 4 

8 Years 5 1.43 

The answer is no. 14 4 

Total 350 100 

Do you use these pesticides? 

The answer is no. 14 4 

Continuously. 128 36.6 

Sometimes. 116 33.1 

In cases of 

necessity. 

92 26.3 

Total 350 100 

When the participants were asked about the reasons for applying pesticides; 

the study findings revealed that there were major differences among the 

participant’s answers (Table 11). Whereas, when the participants were 

asked if the immediate impact of pesticides on the pests, is one of the 



69 
 

 
 

reasons for applying pesticide