Book Fall-Armyworm-IPM-Guide-for-Africa

Fall Armyworm in Africa: A GUIDE FOR INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT First Edition

Fall Armyworm in Africa: A GUIDE FOR INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT First Edition Editors B.M. Prasanna1 | Joseph E. Huesing2 Regina Eddy2 | Virginia M. Peschke3 in collaboration with international and national research and development partners 1CIMMYT; 2USAID; 3Oakside Editorial Services













































































Chapter 3. Pesticide Hazard and Risk Management, and Compatibility with IPM 2.1. Barriers to IPM Implementation and Effective Pesticide Management The authors have wide experience in pesticide management throughout Africa and include here a summary of barriers or constraints that might limit the usefulness of this chapter and/or limit the impacts of the information that it, and planned future publications, contain. These should be borne in mind by anyone seeking to use this information so that barriers to effective and low-risk pesticide use can be addressed explicitly. The barriers fall under four main themes: pesticide regulation and access, pesticide safety capacity, farmer engagement and education, and economics/efficacy data. 2.1.1. Pesticide Regulation and Access • The lack of a mature, current pesticide market in maize limits experience, knowledge, and access to information at all levels in the system, from farmers to educators and researchers in industry, state institutions, and NGOs. The reason for this historically has been low yield, unstable prices, and lack of affordability of pesticides. This means that the infrastructure for IPM and pesticide use education support in maize must be built from the ground up if pesticide use is widely adopted. • Large-scale purchase of pesticides by governments can act as a barrier to successful IPM programs. Usually this is undertaken as a short-term solution without the necessary consultations and the tendency is to buy products that are “perceived” to be very effective, but which may not be compatible with IPM or requirements for low health risks. • Pesticide sale volumes may be too low in some African countries to encourage industrial support for lower-risk chemistries that may themselves require product stewardship if they are to be used efficaciously. Without this support, there will be a tendency for farmers to select highly toxic pesticides that are often inexpensive and easily accessible. This is because highly toxic pesticides can limit pest outbreaks even if they are not applied in an even, calibrated way. These applications are also accompanied by high risks to human health (e.g., Jepson et al. 2014), and they impair long-term management of the target pest(s) because they can eliminate natural enemy populations. • The African marketplace is currently dominated by so called “generic” pesticides, which largely consist of older, more toxic chemistries and which receive limited or no technical support from their manufacturers and distributors. • There is a lack of post-market surveillance capacity across much of the continent to ensure that only properly registered materials are reaching farmers. This can result in undocumented distribution of hazardous materials that may promote pest outbreaks and also harm human health, wildlife, or domesticated animals (Jepson et al. 2014; Donald et al. 2016). • There are some excellent examples of regulatory processes in Africa, including the multi- country system that operates in West Africa (e.g., Jepson et al. 2014). There is however, limited capacity to fully implement the laws and procedures that do exist, and the onus is placed upon farmers to manage pesticide risks. 2.1.2. Capacity for Reducing Pesticide Risk • Personal protective equipment (PPE) may not be compatible with conditions in Africa – and there is evidence that PPE is not available, used, or even marketed (e.g., Williamson et al. 2008; Ajayi and Akinnifesi 2007; Jepson et al. 2014). This should limit the pesticides that are recommended to those that pose low risks even when used without PPE. • Choice of application equipment, effective calibration, and timing of application are critical for efficacy. If these are lacking, pesticide use can increase significantly because repeated applications become necessary. 31

Fall Armyworm in Africa: A Guide for Integrated Pest Management • There is a lack of experience with pesticide container handling and disposal among smallholder farmers. There is a great deal of historical data on the dangers that these containers pose when they are widely available, and this hazard must be part of any pesticide management education program that is undertaken. • There is low capacity for handling biological control agents and for formulating and handling biopesticides, including botanicals that might provide a low risk alternative to conventional, synthetic pesticides. • Technical expertise and infrastructural capacity – the key requirements for a safely regulated marketplace – do not always exist. We therefore have concerns about the potential for pesticide misuse and overuse. Acute and chronic health impacts may not always be documented. 2.1.3. Farmer Engagement and Education • A mechanism is needed to operationalize this material, but it is not immediately apparent how the needs of underserved farmers can be addressed across the large invasion zone of FAW. Farmer Field Schools have the longest and best track record for meeting this need, but multiple modes of education and communication will be necessary. • The remoteness of some audiences, and of many under-represented groups, limits the potential for more complex education programs to reach them, and for critical information about hazard and risk to have the required impact. Radio and other pathways will need to be employed. • Subsistence agriculture, as opposed to commercial agriculture, represents a challenging audience for information-intensive IPM programs, yet it is the dominant form of farming exposed to FAW. Important information about pesticide hazards and risks must be presented in ways that are accessible to audiences who have not previously used toxic chemicals or been exposed to the fundamental concepts of IPM (Parsa et al. 2014; Pretty and Bharucha 2015; Settle et al. 2014). 2.1.4. Economic and Efficacy Data • There is currently a lack of crop economic data and critical information about pesticide efficacy against FAW that is applicable to different crop-growing regions and agroecologies in Africa. It is not possible at present for anyone to develop and deliver pesticide use recommendations that are locally adapted to reflect the available chemicals, local conditions, and costs. • The costs of unintended pesticide impacts on human health (e.g., Maumbe and Swinton 2003) are not factored into current assessments of the suitability of certain pesticides in the management of FAW. 2.2. Accessible and Practical IPM Guidelines IPM programs are successfully adopted and implemented when they have clear goals that include the needs and requirements of the farmers that they are meant to serve. Example goals include: 1. Implement a sustainable cropping system that minimizes economic (food security), health, and environmental risks. 2. Overcome barriers to IPM adoption. 3. Incorporate new, practical findings when these become available. 4. Maximize the contributions by all stakeholders in the process. 32