Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Comparison of Food security and Agriculture Sustainability in Nepal – Adopters of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) verses Non-adopters Amir Poudel Graduate Student Background Pesticide Use in Nepal
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Amir PoudelGraduate Student
Pesticide Use in Nepal
- Usage of already banned pesticides such as DDT in Nepal- Significant use of other pesticides in areas nearby cities poses greatest risk to public health- Economic cost associated with pesticide and fertilizer uses is high
Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
- IPM is a system that controls pests and contributes to long-term sustainability by minimizing the risks of pesticides to human health and the environment (Sorensen, 1994).
- Uses local resources and knowledge
Farmers’ Field School (FFS)
FFS are schools where Integrated Pest Management technology is taught to the farmers
IPM in Nepal
National plant protection strategy of Nepal since 1997 implemented in 64 out of 75 districts. In only 2006/07 400 total (221 for vegetables, 131 for rice, 48 for coffee and rest for other crops)
Consultation with local stakeholders
PRA and RRA
IPM Adapters (160)
Non – Adapters (157)
Sharing of the results
Before and After
With and WithoutResearch objectives
EXPENDITURE IN AGRICULTURE : Average annual expenditure on agriculture for non-adapters ($661.56 ) is higher than adapters ($ 420.03).
EXPENDITURE IN PESTICDES : Adapters spend nearly 3.2 times lesser than non-adapters
EXPENDITURE IN EDUCATION: Adapters spend 1.7 more on education of family members than non-adapters
Reduction of 92.90 percent in Oilseed, 95.83 percent in potato, 90.20 in other vegetables and 82.22 percent in wheat after adapting the technology
Non-adapters used more pesticides than adapters: 95.84 percent more for paddy, 86.63 more for potato and 80.86 more for other vegetables
Change in pesticide use (Subjective)
Food Availability and sufficiency
- Among the three aspects of food security considered, IPM had slightly more positive impact on the food utilization aspect- Adapters have better nutrition distribution for children and pregnant women in the household compared to non-adapters- Adapters took more variety of food products for lunch and dinner during both summer and winter compared to non-adapters- Adapters were more aware in the need to produce better quality food products compared to non-adapter
Social and politicalAgricultural Sustainability
Agricultural sustainability was assessed on the basis of the model postulated by (Cernea, 1991) and (DFID, 2002)
Ecological – reduced use of chemicals during farming enhanced the status of agro-biodiversity of the farming communitiesEconomic: Increased production after adoption, no significant changes in the income from agriculture, enhanced socio-economic statusSocial and political : Increased level of social networking, increased decision making capacity esp. of women, increased employment opportunities, wider political acceptance of the programs (64/75 distrits of Nepal)
Increased demand for adoption
Healthier food production system
Health benefits from reduced exposure to chemicals
Use of local resources and knowledge
Limitation of the studyIPM in CLF Model
Sampling was not possible in the Eastern development region (EDR) of the country due to political unrestHousehold selection depended upon households with FFS (which mainly included areas with highest usage of chemical pesticides)