1143 The future of IPM: whither or wither?

Wednesday, December 16, 2009: 8:20 AM
Room 101, First Floor (Convention Center)
Myron P. Zalucki , School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
Michael J. Furlong , School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
The acronym IPM has been around for over fifty years and now not only supposedly guides research and extension in pest management but also markets pesticides, is claimed to be undertaken by many growers, and even resonates with public perceptions and politicians. Whether or not IPM programs are sustainable in the longer term under the conflicting stresses and strains of the modern agricultural environment is debatable. We analyse three case studies of IPM development in Australia. We question whether or not IPM principles are always consistent with market forces and whether or not the approach is universally applicable for all pest insects. For Australia as a whole over the last thirty years insecticide input costs per hectare have increased faster than the price index, reflecting more costly insecticides, changes to the combinations of crops grown and an increase in the overall area of crops cultivated together with possible concomitant changes in pest abundance. Any pest crisis will ensure rapid changes in practice and adoption of technologies, in order to mitigate the short term financial stresses caused. However, regression to former practices tends to follow. In most cases we cannot objectively test if changed management practices are responsible for changes in pest abundance, as is often claimed, or if the latter is simply a consequence of the weather and/or related large-scale landscape features (e.g. area of host plants). We argue that for many systems the future of pest management practice will require a change to landscape or area-wide approaches.

doi: 10.1603/ICE.2016.41798

Previous Presentation | Next Presentation >>