PAN International Website

Insecticide-free cotton is feasible and profitable

Arif Hamid and Ashraf Poswal report on the growing impact of cotton IPM training through Farmer Field Schools in the Punjab Province of Pakistan. A pilot training project in 1997 enabled smallholder cotton farmers from Vehari District in the Punjab to become effective IPM practitioners by learning about the agroecology of key pests and the beneficial insects which control them. (See PN 40 pp12-13).  

Farmer Field Schools (FFS) are season-long training programmes, based on field observations, discovery-learning and group discussion. Participants compare their current practice with IPM methods and gain crop management decision-making skills.
   
In the Pakistan FFS, the trained farmers made decisions that enabled them to reduce their insecticide inputs by 68% while maintaining or even increasing crop yield and quality. The continuing impact of the project was assessed at the beginning of the 1999 growing season. An initial survey revealed that of the ten FFS farmer groups trained in 1997, five were still very active. At least 80% of the graduates were still involved in active FFS groups and the most visible effect of the training was that they were familiar with various stages of pests and beneficial insects and many were conducting agro-ecosystem analysis (AESA) in their own fields, outside the group sessions. At the five other sites, FFS groups were less active but insecticide application remained much reduced compared with before the training.
    Untrained farmers in the same localities were also interviewed. Some of the untrained farmers were familiar with some beneficial insects, and more knew the term IPM but they had no real understanding of the concepts, or of how to put IPM into practice in their fields. It appeared that some spontaneous dissemination of IPM practices was taking place but insufficient to give untrained farmers a sound basis for changing their management practices.
    Further FFS training took place in the 1999 season at the request of Catholic Relief Service (CRS), an international NGO interested in improving the livelihoods, health and food security of small-scale cotton growers in the Punjab. Training was organized by CABI Bioscience Pakistan Centre and Vehari District extension officers in close collaboration with five community-based organizations (CBOs) coordinated by CRS. Five trainers from each CBO, many of whom are cotton farmers themselves, were trained as FFS facilitators, each taking responsibility for facilitating activities with five farmers in each FFS group. Good local networks have been built up as a result of this community-level participation. Their effectiveness was demonstrated by the fact that over 90% of non-participating farmers in the five FFS communities also reduced or eliminated insecticide application on their cotton in 1999. Fourteen half-day FFS sessions were held at each site over the cotton season and farmers also learnt how to conduct agro-ecosystem analysis in their maize and brinjal (aubergine) crops, to decide on irrigation, weeding, fertilizer and pest management.
   
During the 1999 season, FFS groups again avoided early season insecticide application in all plots and were able to eliminate chemical control altogether in their IPM plots. Previously the farmers would have used the highly hazardous organophosphates monocrotophos and methamidophos. Table 1 summarizes the input costs, yield, revenue and net profit for both the IPM and Farmers’ Practice plots (current reliance on chemical control) which were set up by each FFS group to compare costs and benefits. The results confirm for a second season the economic benefits of IPM in cotton. In the Punjab context it is critical for FFS projects to convince farmers and extension staff that IPM can be viable over a range of variation in pest pressure, climate and prices for inputs and produce.
   
Before the 1999 training began FFS graduates from 1997 were asked to assess their confidence at making IPM decisions without support. Surprisingly, one-third of all trained farmers expressed no confidence at all, and the average level of confidence was only 50%. This was despite being familiar with key pests and beneficial insects in their different lifecycle stages and retaining an understanding of IPM terminology, its philosophy and importance.
   
The reasons for this lack of confidence may partly be due to the variability in pests that attack cotton in the Punjab. Pest status and levels can differ hugely between seasons. The 1997 season, for example, was marked by low Helicoverpa bollworm pressure in some areas while whitefly and associated viral disease was critical. Farmers who trained during that year had ample reinforcement of IPM practices appropriate for whitefly outbreaks during the season. However, in 1998 Helicoverpa bollworm caused havoc in most areas and insecticide application frequency increased among all farmers but in many cases failed to control the problem. FFS graduates sprayed fewer times on average than their untrained neighbours. In 1999, spotted bollworm (Earias spp.) was identified by many farmers as the major production constraint. Yields have also fluctuated considerably over the last three years. It is evident that one season’s training alone is not sufficient to prepare farmers or facilitators to manage this variation with full confidence. Follow-up and post-training support are therefore particularly important to help FFS graduates, farmer groups and facilitators cope with the huge variability in pest dynamics.
    The success of the 1999 training with the community-based organizations demonstrated the viability of the FFS approach under different pest attack and economic situations. It also indicated some useful side effects in persuading neighbouring farmers to rethink their pest control strategies.  There is now acceptance in wider circles in Pakistan of the FFS approach. This recognition will help to facilitate implementation of future cotton IPM programmes.

Table1. Cost/benefit of IPM cotton in 1999 season at five FFS sites
  Farmers’ practice plots   IPM plots
Number of insecticide sprays 2.8* (0-5)+                                 zero
Insecticide costs (purchase and application) 2619 Rupees/ha (0-4695) zero

Total input costs (fertilizer, irrigation, hoeing, weeding, ploughing, insecticides)

7640 Rs/ha (4225-11,243)

4695 (3978-6054)

Yield kg/ha                   

1172 (734-1570)        

1301 (783-1977)
Revenue 650 Rs per 40kg                           19,054 Rs (11,928-25,513)        21,146 (12,729-32,126)

Net profit                       

11,413 Rs (7512-15,895)

16,541 (8750-27,777)

*= average, += range

Dr Ashraf Poswal is the Regional Bioscience Coordinator, CABI Bioscience Centre, PO Box 8, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, a.poswal@cabi.org, Fax: +92 51 451 147; and Arif Hamid is an Entomologist at CABI Bioscience Pakistan.

[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No.49, September 2000, p9]


Subscriptions
Publications
Email the Editor