Abstract
Key to contemporary management of diseases such as malaria, dengue, and filariasis is control of the insect vectors responsible for transmission. Insecticide‐based interventions have contributed to declines in disease burdens in many areas, but this progress could be threatened by the emergence of insecticide resistance in vector populations. Insecticide resistance is likewise a major concern in agriculture, where insect pests can cause substantial yield losses. Here, we explore overlaps between understanding and managing insecticide resistance in agriculture and in public health. We have used the Global Plan for Insecticide Resistance Management in malaria vectors, developed under the auspices of the World Health Organization Global Malaria Program, as a framework for this exploration because it serves as one of the few cohesive documents for managing a global insecticide resistance crisis. Generally, this comparison highlights some fundamental differences between insect control in agriculture and in public health. Moreover, we emphasize that the success of insecticide resistance management strategies is strongly dependent on the biological specifics of each system. We suggest that the biological, operational, and regulatory differences between agriculture and public health limit the wholesale transfer of knowledge and practices from one system to the other. Nonetheless, there are some valuable insights from agriculture that could assist in advancing the existing Global Plan for Insecticide Resistance Management framework.
Highlights
Resistance to insecticides is widespread in the different mosquito species that transmit malaria, dengue, and filariasis, and in other insect species with public health importance (Hemingway & Ranson, 2000; Ranson, Burhani, Lumjuan, & Black IV, 2010; Ranson & Lissenden, 2016)
In response to this insecticide resistance crisis, the WHO Global Malaria Program has produced a document known as the Global Plan for Insecticide Resistance Management in malaria vectors (GPIRM) (World Health Organization, 2012a), to serve as an action plan for combating insecticide resistance
The GPIRM is structured around five interrelated activities or “pillars” that outline a specific, global strategy for managing insecticide resistance in malaria vectors, namely: (i) plan and implement insecticide resistance management strategies, (ii) ensure proper resistance monitoring, (iii) develop new vector control tools, (iv) fill knowledge gaps, and (v) ensure that key enabling mechanisms are in place
Summary
Alternative approaches, a number of which are already in the later stages of development, include house screening (Kirby et al, 2009), eave tubes (Sternberg et al, 2016), attractive toxic sugar baits (Müller et al, 2010), spatial repellents (Achee et al, 2012), entomopathogenic fungus-impregnated targets (Heinig, Paaijmans, Hancock, & Thomas, 2015), mass trapping (Homan et al, 2016), and diverse strategies targeting zoophilic vectors (Chaccour et al, 2015; Massebo, Balkew, Gebre-Michael, & Lindtjørn, 2015; Waite et al, 2017) These new approaches, together with established strategies of larval source management (Tusting et al, 2013), could all potentially contribute within an IVM framework. Public health is concerned with a small number of insect species This should enable a strongly data-driven approach to selecting resistance management strategies, but in reality, very little is currently known.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
