Additional Information

Field Value
Data last updated November 12, 2024
Metadata last updated August 18, 2025
Created November 12, 2024
Format PDF
License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
Datastore activeFalse
Datastore contains all records of source fileFalse
Has viewsTrue
Ide46a1948-b38f-414c-b3f5-c43065cef4a3
Mimetypeapplication/pdf
Name translated{'en': 'Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa ', 'km': 'Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa ', 'lo': 'Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa ', 'my_MM': 'Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa ', 'vi': 'Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa '}
Package idc067c3f4-1ac4-49bc-a771-d4abed5bde2b
Position0
Resource description{'en': 'Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a leading complement and alternative to\r\nsynthetic pesticides and a form of sustainable intensification with particular importance for\r\ntropical smallholders. Global pesticide use has grown over the past 20 years to 3.5 billion\r\nkg/year, amounting to a global market worth $45 billion. The external costs of pesticides are\r\n$4–$19 (€3–15) per kg of active ingredient applied, suggesting that IPM approaches that\r\nresult in lower pesticide use will benefit, not only farmers, but also wider environments and\r\nhuman health. Evidence for IPM’s impacts on pesticide use and yields remains patchy. We\r\ncontribute an evaluation using data from 85 IPM projects from 24 countries of Asia and\r\nAfrica implemented over the past twenty years. Analysing outcomes on productivity and\r\nreliance on pesticides, we find a mean yield increase across projects and crops of 40.9%, combined with a decline in pesticide use to 30.7% compared with\r\nbaseline. A total of 35 of 115 (30%) crop combinations resulted in a transition to zero\r\npesticide use. We assess successes in four types of IPM projects, and find that at least 50%\r\nof pesticide use is not needed in most agroecosystems. Nonetheless, policy support for IPM\r\nis relatively rare, counter-interventions from pesticide industry common, and the IPM\r\nchallenge never done as pests, diseases and weeds evolve and move. \r\n', 'km': 'Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a leading complement and alternative to\r\nsynthetic pesticides and a form of sustainable intensification with particular importance for\r\ntropical smallholders. Global pesticide use has grown over the past 20 years to 3.5 billion\r\nkg/year, amounting to a global market worth $45 billion. The external costs of pesticides are\r\n$4–$19 (€3–15) per kg of active ingredient applied, suggesting that IPM approaches that\r\nresult in lower pesticide use will benefit, not only farmers, but also wider environments and\r\nhuman health. Evidence for IPM’s impacts on pesticide use and yields remains patchy. We\r\ncontribute an evaluation using data from 85 IPM projects from 24 countries of Asia and\r\nAfrica implemented over the past twenty years. Analysing outcomes on productivity and\r\nreliance on pesticides, we find a mean yield increase across projects and crops of 40.9%, combined with a decline in pesticide use to 30.7% compared with\r\nbaseline. A total of 35 of 115 (30%) crop combinations resulted in a transition to zero\r\npesticide use. We assess successes in four types of IPM projects, and find that at least 50%\r\nof pesticide use is not needed in most agroecosystems. Nonetheless, policy support for IPM\r\nis relatively rare, counter-interventions from pesticide industry common, and the IPM\r\nchallenge never done as pests, diseases and weeds evolve and move. \r\n', 'lo': 'Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a leading complement and alternative to\r\nsynthetic pesticides and a form of sustainable intensification with particular importance for\r\ntropical smallholders. Global pesticide use has grown over the past 20 years to 3.5 billion\r\nkg/year, amounting to a global market worth $45 billion. The external costs of pesticides are\r\n$4–$19 (€3–15) per kg of active ingredient applied, suggesting that IPM approaches that\r\nresult in lower pesticide use will benefit, not only farmers, but also wider environments and\r\nhuman health. Evidence for IPM’s impacts on pesticide use and yields remains patchy. We\r\ncontribute an evaluation using data from 85 IPM projects from 24 countries of Asia and\r\nAfrica implemented over the past twenty years. Analysing outcomes on productivity and\r\nreliance on pesticides, we find a mean yield increase across projects and crops of 40.9%, combined with a decline in pesticide use to 30.7% compared with\r\nbaseline. A total of 35 of 115 (30%) crop combinations resulted in a transition to zero\r\npesticide use. We assess successes in four types of IPM projects, and find that at least 50%\r\nof pesticide use is not needed in most agroecosystems. Nonetheless, policy support for IPM\r\nis relatively rare, counter-interventions from pesticide industry common, and the IPM\r\nchallenge never done as pests, diseases and weeds evolve and move. \r\n', 'my_MM': 'Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a leading complement and alternative to\r\nsynthetic pesticides and a form of sustainable intensification with particular importance for\r\ntropical smallholders. Global pesticide use has grown over the past 20 years to 3.5 billion\r\nkg/year, amounting to a global market worth $45 billion. The external costs of pesticides are\r\n$4–$19 (€3–15) per kg of active ingredient applied, suggesting that IPM approaches that\r\nresult in lower pesticide use will benefit, not only farmers, but also wider environments and\r\nhuman health. Evidence for IPM’s impacts on pesticide use and yields remains patchy. We\r\ncontribute an evaluation using data from 85 IPM projects from 24 countries of Asia and\r\nAfrica implemented over the past twenty years. Analysing outcomes on productivity and\r\nreliance on pesticides, we find a mean yield increase across projects and crops of 40.9%, combined with a decline in pesticide use to 30.7% compared with\r\nbaseline. A total of 35 of 115 (30%) crop combinations resulted in a transition to zero\r\npesticide use. We assess successes in four types of IPM projects, and find that at least 50%\r\nof pesticide use is not needed in most agroecosystems. Nonetheless, policy support for IPM\r\nis relatively rare, counter-interventions from pesticide industry common, and the IPM\r\nchallenge never done as pests, diseases and weeds evolve and move. \r\n', 'vi': 'Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a leading complement and alternative to\r\nsynthetic pesticides and a form of sustainable intensification with particular importance for\r\ntropical smallholders. Global pesticide use has grown over the past 20 years to 3.5 billion\r\nkg/year, amounting to a global market worth $45 billion. The external costs of pesticides are\r\n$4–$19 (€3–15) per kg of active ingredient applied, suggesting that IPM approaches that\r\nresult in lower pesticide use will benefit, not only farmers, but also wider environments and\r\nhuman health. Evidence for IPM’s impacts on pesticide use and yields remains patchy. We\r\ncontribute an evaluation using data from 85 IPM projects from 24 countries of Asia and\r\nAfrica implemented over the past twenty years. Analysing outcomes on productivity and\r\nreliance on pesticides, we find a mean yield increase across projects and crops of 40.9%, combined with a decline in pesticide use to 30.7% compared with\r\nbaseline. A total of 35 of 115 (30%) crop combinations resulted in a transition to zero\r\npesticide use. We assess successes in four types of IPM projects, and find that at least 50%\r\nof pesticide use is not needed in most agroecosystems. Nonetheless, policy support for IPM\r\nis relatively rare, counter-interventions from pesticide industry common, and the IPM\r\nchallenge never done as pests, diseases and weeds evolve and move. \r\n'}
Size251.8 KiB
Stateactive
Url typeupload
Name Integrated Pest Management for Sustainable Intensification of Agriculture in Asia and Africa
Description

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%, combined with a decline in pesticide use to 30.7% 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.