|
| |
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]
|