Measuring the unmeasurable? A method to quantify adoption of integrated pest management practices in temperate arable farming systems

Use of insect pest thresholds in oilseed rape and cereals: is it worth it?

BACKGROUND

Integrated pest management (IPM) uses thresholds to minimize pesticide use, and field monitoring of damaging organisms is an important component to evaluate whether or not thresholds have been breached. However, monitoring requires time and knowledge which impacts costs and benefits. In this study, we evaluated the effects of using insect pest thresholds on time effort, frequency of insecticide treatment and economics in comparison with common farm practices (business as usual) in winter wheat (WW), winter barley (WB) and winter oilseed rape (OSR). This study was done over 2 years (2018 to 2020) on 24 conventionally managed farms in North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany).

RESULTS

Farmers spent significantly more time (42 min ha-1/season) monitoring insect pests in OSR than in WW (16 min ha-1/season) and WB (19 min ha-1/season). The use of insecticides in OSR was significantly reduced by 42% in comparison to business as usual. In cereal crops, the use of insecticide treatment was reduced by 50% but this was not significantly different to business as usual. Yields were not significantly reduced when crops were managed in accordance with IPM, and negative differences were small and not significant. However, economically, the costs of monitoring can only be recovered when labor costs and commodity prices are low and insecticide cost is high.

CONCLUSION

Insect pest thresholds can help link the policy and environmental goals of insecticide reduction and the agronomic goal of production security. In the future, the time and cost required for monitoring should be reduced through intelligent solutions and tools, increasing the economic viability of monitoring and IPM. © 2023 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

Does the certification of agriculture products promote the adoption of integrated pest management among apple growers in China?

Seeking effective policies for reducing chemical pesticides has recently been the focus of agricultural sustainable development. A randomly selected sample of 559 small-scale farmers on the China Loess Plateau was investigated in 2018. We analyzed the effect of certification of agricultural production on the adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) by using the Poisson regression model. The result shows that the certification of agriculture products, subsidies of integrated pest management, and the price increase of certified agriculture products significantly promote the adoption of IPM. However, government supervision in certified agriculture products does not significantly promote the adoption of IPM. The cognition of IPM acquired by farmers significantly promotes the adoption of IPM, while the age of farmers negatively affects the adoption of IPM. We suggest that the government should strengthen the certification of agriculture products and provide subsidies of the adoption of IPM for farmers who produce certified agriculture products. The market needs to guarantee a higher price of certified agro-products which the IPM are adopted. The government should strengthen supervision of certified agriculture products, promote the extension of IPM and enhance farmers' knowledge of IPM, and promote more farmers to replace chemical pesticides with IPM.

Identifying the drivers and constraints to adoption of IPM among arable farmers in the UK and Ireland

BACKGROUND

Arable crops in temperate climatic regions such as the UK and Ireland are subject to a multitude of pests (weeds, diseases and vertebrate/invertebrate pests) that can negatively impact productivity if not properly managed. Integrated pest management (IPM) is widely promoted as a sustainable approach to pest management, yet there are few recent studies assessing adoption levels and factors influencing this in arable cropping systems in the UK and Ireland. This study used an extensive farmer survey to address both these issues.

RESULTS

Adoption levels of various IPM practices varied across the sample depending on a range of factors relating to both farm and farmer characteristics. Positive relationships were observed between IPM adoption and farmed area, and familiarity with IPM. Choice of pest control information sources was also found to be influential on farmer familiarity with IPM, with those who were proactive in seeking information from impartial sources being more engaged and reporting higher levels of adoption.

CONCLUSION

Policies that encourage farmers to greater levels of engagement with their pest management issues and more proactive information seeking, such as through advisory professionals, more experienced peers through crop walks, open days and discussion groups should be strongly encouraged.

Delivering Integrated Pest and Pollinator Management (IPPM)

The need to reduce pollinator exposure to harmful pesticides has led to calls to expedite the adoption of integrated pest management (IPM). We make the case that IPM is not explicitly 'pollinator friendly', but rather must be adapted to reduce impacts on pollinators and to facilitate synergies between crop pollination and pest control practices and ecosystem services. To reconcile these diverse needs, we introduce a systematic framework for 'integrated pest and pollinator management' (IPPM). We also highlight novel tools to unify monitoring and economic decision-making processes for IPPM and outline key policy actions and knowledge gaps. We propose that IPPM is needed to promote more coordinated, ecosystem-based strategies for sustainable food production, against the backdrop of increasing pesticide regulation and pollinator dependency in agriculture. VIDEO ABSTRACT.