Integrated Pest Management Experiences with Implementation, Global Overview, Vol.4 by Peshin and Pimentel

Bibliographic Information:
Title: Integrated Pest Management Experiences with Implementation, Global Overview
Editor: Rajinder Peshin
David Pimentel
Volume: 4th
Publisher: Springer
Length: 610 pages
Size: 11.7 MB
Language: English

World-wide integrated pest management (IPM) is the accepted policy decision for
pest management. However, in reality this often becomes “integrated pesticide
management”. There is also debate and confusion about the primary quantifiable
objective of IPM. The strategy of IPM and its implementation and evaluation has always
struggled with interpretation and true progress. There are different schools of
thoughts: one promoting the integrated pesticide management, thus training farmers
in right use of pesticides to minimize selection for resistance, conserve beneficials
and reduce health and pollution risks. Second: integrated pest management incorporating
ecologically sound pest management tactics so that pesticides are essentially
a last resort. Third: propagating pesticide free pest management. Fourth: overrelying
on Bt crops to reduce insecticide use. However, use of pesticides should be
limited to where no effective alternatives are available.
World pesticide use stabilized in the last two decades. The insect resistant transgenic
crops, IPM and pesticide use reduction programs, and low volume pesticides
were the drivers for stabilizing the pesticide use in China, United States of America
and India. But lately there has been an increase in the pesticide use in these countries.
Introduction of herbicide resistant crops in Canada and United States has increased
herbicide use in the US and Canada. European countries, namely Denmark,
Netherlands and Sweden, have halved the pesticide use in the last two decades by
introducing pesticide action plans, implementing IPM programs and use of low
dosage highly toxic pesticides compared with say, DDT (Chap. 19, 20, 21 and 22).
Bt crops are compatible with IPM strategies but Bt crops alone are not sustainable.
Overreliance on transgenic crops has already led to the weed and insect
resistance (Chap. 4) which may lead farmers into a transgenic-cum-pesticide treadmill.
Experiences with implementation of pesticide action plans and IPM programs
around the world confirm that reduction in pesticide use by mass is not the robust
indicator to measure success of IPM. Low volume pesticides propelled the pesticide
use reduction in many countries (Chap. 11, 22). The pesticide treatment frequency
index and the environmental impact quotient are better evaluation indicators to
measure the impact of IPM programs.
What experiences with IPM technology and IPM extension that are documented
in this book can be bracketed successful and viable? In many instances IPM
technologies developed
at the research level have not been effectively scaled up
to industry-wide practice because of the lack of a well conceived and evaluated
extension process. Different extension approaches are needed in different situations
for greater adoption of IPM by the farmers. IPM practices in most cases are tested
for success at pilot scale but fail to factor in the constraints, mainly the IPM attributes,
for replication in large scale. The authorities in IPM research and extension
throughout the world have contributed to the book and covered the experiences with
different IPM approaches and implementation in North America, South America,
Africa, Europe, Asia and Australia.

Dont' miss Latest Books inside your Box and Join 5000+ Subscribers.
And VERIFY EMAIL After Subscription Because Without Verifying You Won't be Able to Get Latest Book.