Reorganizing to facilitate the development and use of integrated pest management

Abstract

Integrated pest management (IPM) is the systems approach to reducing pest damage to tolerable levels using biological controls, cultural controls, genetically resistant hosts, and, when appropriate, chemical controls, especially those which are selective and do not contribute to environmental contamination and human health problems. Basic elements of an IPM program include research and extension to produce a body of information on farming practices and pest biology, a program for monitoring pests, natural enemies and crop status throughout the season, control action thresholds, IPM tactics for pest control, and crop consultants to apply the program. IPM programs are far from being universally adopted, even when available and validated. Important constraints to IPM use have been categorized as technical, financial, educational, institutional and social issues. Many of these factors are not mutually exclusive. In many instances, the basic biology of pests, beneficial organisms, and their interaction in agricultural ecosystems is not understood. IPM researchers should be aware of the ultimate use of their work. Risk is probably the most important financial obstacle to IPM adoption by growers. Availability of funding is also a limitation of IPM research. User education is a key element in succesful implementation of complex technologies such as IPM. When comprehensive and well-organized programs have been attempted, the level of adoption has often been high and the amount of pesticide use demonstrably reduced. Such programs have helped to accelerate the development of the private pest management industry which provides information services to growers on crop production and pesticide use. Institutional constraints are extremely important, and their structures may actually hinder IPM development and use. The development and use of IPM could be enhanced through institutional reorganization. Better analysis of the impact of regulations and farm policy on pesticide use should be instituted so that such government efforts do not actually increase pesticide use. Private sector incentives for developing and marketing biological controls and biological pesticides should be made. Development of the private pest management industry should be encouraged possibly linking the issue to stronger controls on the purchase and use of pesticides. Better marketing of IPM should be both studied and encouraged.