This study investigates the cost–benefit of Cambodia Good Agricultural Practices (CamGAP) versus conventional vegetable farming (non-CamGAP) in northwest Cambodia, where food safety is increasingly critical for public health and trade. The research describes the vegetable value chain, identifies consumer behaviours of actors that may contribute to potential cross-contamination, and assesses consumers’ perceptions of vegetable safety and consumption. Data were collected from 100 CamGAP-certified and 102 non-CamGAP farms, 32 input suppliers, 60 collectors, 97 retailers, 17 service providers, and 159 consumers in the provinces of Banteay Meanchey, Battambang, and Pailin. Findings reveal that GAP farmers spent significantly less on chemical inputs (e.g. synthetic pesticides and fertilizers) but significantly more on organic fertilizer. There was no significant difference in average overall crop yield between CamGAP (19.91 t/ha) and non-CamGAP (24.85 t/ha) farms. CamGAP certification was significantly associated with lower yield loss (1.39 vs. 2.02 t/ha) and higher gross profit (USD 9,513 vs. USD 8,218/ha) for hybrid seed crops (not for open-pollinated ones). The average benefit–cost ration (BCR) was also higher for CamGAP farms (5.52) than for non‑CamGAP farms (4.90). Levels of concern about vegetable safety varied across demographic groups, product types, and market environments, with farmers and younger consumers expressing the greatest concern, particularly for flowers and leaves, while supermarkets were perceived as safest. Additionally, CamGAP enhances consumer safety by implementing an extended waiting period between pesticide application and harvesting. This, combined with more direct market access to consumers and retailers, contributes to the enhanced profitability of CamGAP farms.
Srean et al. (Mon,) studied this question.