Next Article in Journal
Sexual Behavior of Drosophila suzukii
Next Article in Special Issue
Field Study of the Comparative Efficacy of Three Pyrethroid/Neonicotinoid Mixture Products for the Control of the Common Bed Bug, Cimex lectularius
Previous Article in Journal
Foliar Substrate Affects Cuticular Hydrocarbon Profiles and Intraspecific Aggression in the Leafcutter Ant Atta sexdens
Previous Article in Special Issue
Aggression in Tephritidae Flies: Where, When, Why? Future Directions for Research in Integrated Pest Management
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Insects 2015, 6(1), 152-182; doi:10.3390/insects6010152

Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa

1
Department of Biological Sciences and Essex Sustainability Institute, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK
2
Department of Sociology and Essex Sustainability Institute, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Michael J. Stout
Received: 5 January 2015 / Revised: 20 February 2015 / Accepted: 24 February 2015 / Published: 5 March 2015
(This article belongs to the Collection Integrated Pest Management)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [252 KB, uploaded 5 March 2015]   |  

Abstract

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a leading complement and alternative to synthetic pesticides and a form of sustainable intensification with particular importance for tropical smallholders. Global pesticide use has grown over the past 20 years to 3.5 billion kg/year, amounting to a global market worth $45 billion. The external costs of pesticides are $4–$19 (€3–15) per kg of active ingredient applied, suggesting that IPM approaches that result in lower pesticide use will benefit, not only farmers, but also wider environments and human health. Evidence for IPM’s impacts on pesticide use and yields remains patchy. We contribute an evaluation using data from 85 IPM projects from 24 countries of Asia and Africa implemented over the past twenty years. Analysing outcomes on productivity and reliance on pesticides, we find a mean yield increase across projects and crops of 40.9% (SD 72.3), combined with a decline in pesticide use to 30.7% (SD 34.9) compared with baseline. A total of 35 of 115 (30%) crop combinations resulted in a transition to zero pesticide use. We assess successes in four types of IPM projects, and find that at least 50% of pesticide use is not needed in most agroecosystems. Nonetheless, policy support for IPM is relatively rare, counter-interventions from pesticide industry common, and the IPM challenge never done as pests, diseases and weeds evolve and move. View Full-Text
Keywords: farmer field schools; integrated pest management; social capital; sustainable intensification; resilience farmer field schools; integrated pest management; social capital; sustainable intensification; resilience
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Pretty, J.; Bharucha, Z.P. Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa. Insects 2015, 6, 152-182.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Insects EISSN 2075-4450 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top