Articles
DISCUSSION EVENING SYMPOSIUM ES 5: INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT FOR VEGETABLE PRODUCTION IN THE TROPICS ON TUESDAY, 4 AUGUST
Article number
513_13
Pages
119 – 122
Language
Abstract
- The theme of the discussion were the forces that can be used to make an end to the excessive pesticide use? This approach was considered important and promising, because vegetables are becoming more and more important as cash crops.
It means that Governments, farmers and private companies are making money out of vegetables.
We should use this intrinsic interest in vegetables intelligently to improve the overall crop protection situation in vegetable production, including making the sector less reliant on pesticide use.
Since there’s a lot of money involved, there are important forces at stake that can be mobilized towards more ecological vegetable production.
The commercial interests make the development of vegetable IPM much less dependent on donor funding than e.g.
IPM in basic food crops such as millet and sorghum.
Important means are:- to stimulate farmers’ involvement in the IPM technology generation process so that farmers start demanding alternatives, and apply safer and cheaper pest control methods others than synthetic pesticides;
- to introduce mandatory levels of residue tolerance in harvested produce;
- to control the vegetable markets on residues;
- to educate students at all levels from primary school to university on IPM, alternatives for synthetic pesticides, and risks involved in chemical control;
- to excite governments to start a national IPM policy in order to protect the export market for vegetables;
- to inform the public in general about the risks of excessive pesticide use for their own health and the environment.
- The overall picture of pesticide use in vegetable production areas in the tropics, as sketched by the presentations from Asia, Africa and Latin America, is rather alarming.
Pushed by aggressive marketing strategies of pesticide dealers, the farmers are using increasing quantities of pesticides.
Also because for a number of key pests, no good non-chemical control methods are available.
Farmers are not only pushed by pesticide salesmen, but also by extension agents who have little else to tell than ‘use pesticides’. It seems that Plant protection research is still dominated by pesticide screening trials.
Research on IPM is fragmented, not demand-driven and not holistic.
In most countries a national IPM policy is lacking, research capacity and funding largely insufficient.
For a successful IPM programme, it would be necessary to involve and educate the farmers.
Ecological research should be strengthened and biological and cultural control methods and host plant resistance developed. - It was stated that NARs in general couldn’t play a significant role because they are lacking funds and research capacity.
In national vegetable production programmes, little room is left for IPM. Be careful with such a remark.
Above it is stated that ‘Plant protection research is still dominated by pesticide screening trials’. This means that there is research going on.
The question is how to re-orient this research.
This is a more meaning full remark than simply saying NARs can’t play a role. - Some participants did not expect much impact from the education of the consumers to raise their awareness, because consumers don’t make rational decisions.
The best argument to convince farmers to use IPM methods is to prove and show that (at least in long term) they get more profit if they leave pesticides out.
We still have to learn a lot on the risks and the possibilities of IPM. For instance some IPM workers had the experience that farmers don’t like to work with thresholds, because it is too risky.
They work easier with crop stages, and need simple messages.
Authors
Dr. F. Meerman, D. G.J.H. Grubben, Dr. M.A. Beek, Ir. A.A. Laurense
Keywords
Online Articles (61)