Forum VI Plenary Session on IPM & IVM

Lead sponsors: IFCS/FSC WG IVP & IPM/03 Islamic Republic of Iran (N. Heidari) and PANAP (S. Rengam) Forum VI Thought Starter Version 2/ FINAL Draft 12 February 2008

Forum VI Plenary session on IPM & IVM THOUGHT STARTER

Title :

Forum Standing Committee to take decision on the title at its meeting 26-28 February 2008

Proposals:

1. Ecologically Sound and Integrated Pest Management and Integrated Vector Management

2. Pesticide Risk Reduction and Sustainable Pest and Vector Management through IPM and IVM

3. Ecologically-Based IPM and IVM: A key Element of Pesticide Risk Reduction Strategies

**** The original title "Ecologically sound and integrated pest and vector management" was taken from the list of possible topics for future sessions of the Forum prepared by Forum V.

The Working Group discussed its mandate and the scope and objective of the Forum VI plenary session. A number of WG members are of the view that the title should be clearer and more accurately reflect the scope and objective of the session. Those advocating for a change put forward the following argument Integrated Pest and Vector Management (IPVM) is a new term used for a new area, in which IVM is integrated into IPM Farmer Field Schools. This approach is being piloted in Sri Lanka with technical and operational assistance from FAO and financial assistance from FAO, then UNEP and now WHO. This approach is still under development. Although promising, it is still in the research stage and has not yet provided solid results.

The terms Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Integrated Vector Management (IVM) on the other hand refer to well-established approaches with implementation in many countries.

As the focus of the proposed IFCS Session is IPM and IVM, it would therefore not seem correct to use the term Integrate Pest and Vector Management in the title. IPVM is used for a specific overlap area between IPM and IVM, not for the sum of the two.

There is more to IVM than its overlap with IPM – and it should be acknowledged that the positive link between IVM and IPM is not a foregone conclusion. There may be conflicts of interest such as when the International Rice Research Institute was requested to reduce mosquito larval breeding in irrigated rice fields in Indonesia. In the IPM approach, the mosquito larvae played a very important role in the ecosystem foodweb, as a source of food for predators during the time there were no pest insects to feed on.

There are IVM settings beyond agricultural production systems (including urban areas). IVM is a public health approach in its own right, which, where feasible, should be combined to the extent possible with IPM approaches.

The WG considered a number of titles for the session but was unable to reach agreement on the most appropriate title/subtitle to communicate the subject of the session and adhere to the mandate of the WG. At its 77th meeting, the FSC agreed to take a decision on the title at its next meeting pending any further input from members. No additional input was received. Lead sponsors: IFCS/FSC WG IVP & IPM/03 Islamic Republic of Iran (N. Heidari) and PANAP (S. Rengam) Forum VI Thought Starter Version 2/ FINAL Draft 12 February 2008

2 Lead sponsors: IFCS/FSC WG IVP & IPM/03 Islamic Republic of Iran (N. Heidari) and PANAP (S. Rengam) Forum VI Thought Starter Version 2/ FINAL Draft 12 February 2008

1. Introduction

There is strong and broad evidence that Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Integrated Vector Management (IVM) offer valid alternatives for conventional pest and vector control that tend to rely on use of pesticides. As such, these approaches can make substantial contributions to reduction in the use of pesticides and associated risks.

Forum III in 2000 adopted revised and updated Priorities for Action on establishment of risk reduction programmes. The priorities included:

D1. To protect human health and the environment (including surface and ground water), countries should establish ecologically sound and integrated strategies for the management of pests and, where appropriate, vectors for communicable diseases

At Forum IV in 2003 participants considered in-depth the topic of acutely toxic pesticides and adopted, inter alia, the following recommendation:

Recognising that poisoning of pesticide users and their communities, especially agricultural workers and small farmers in developing countries and countries with economies in transition, must be prevented, national governments are hereby provided with guidance for sound risk management and reduction actions, in particular those related to acutely toxic pesticides.

Governments should, with the commitment and support of international, regional and local stakeholders, such as international organizations, scientific and medical communities, pesticide and agricultural workers, labour unions, small farmers and indigenous peoples, take a variety of actions, best suited to their needs and capacities, such as:

II. Regulatory Actions 1) promote Integrated Pest and Production Management

The IFCS Priorities for Action and Forum IV recommendations were the basis for the development of Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM) adopted by the International Conference on Chemicals Management in February 2006. The SAICM Global Plan of Action includes several activities addressing the topic:

Objective 1: Risk reduction Work area: Highly toxic pesticides – risk management and reduction Activity 29. Promote integrated pest and integrated vector management Work area: Sound agriculture practices Activity 50. Develop schemes for integrated pest management Objective 2: Knowledge and information Work area: Sound agricultural practices Activity 159. Establish ecologically sound and integrated strategies for the management of pests and, where appropriate, vectors for communicable diseases.

The purpose of the plenary session at Forum VI on IPM and IVM is to support and encourage governments, intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations and the private sector to strengthen the role of IPM and IVM as a means to reduce reliance on pesticides and as a key element of pesticide risk reduction strategies, while maintaining the potential for agricultural pest and vector- borne disease control.

2. Background

In some countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America, vector-borne diseases contribute to a considerable percentage of the total burden of communicable diseases; this is particularly true in relation to malaria in sub-Saharan Africa. The most important vector-borne diseases harming human health in those regions with side-effects for environment are malaria and lymphatic filariasis transmitted by mosquitoes, and leishmaniases transmitted by sand flies. The potential for spread of West Nile fever

3 Lead sponsors: IFCS/FSC WG IVP & IPM/03 Islamic Republic of Iran (N. Heidari) and PANAP (S. Rengam) Forum VI Thought Starter Version 2/ FINAL Draft 12 February 2008 and yellow fever in these regions particularly in Africa is very high. Other arboviral diseases of a more regional significance include dengue, Japanese encephalitis and Chikungunya virus infection.

Malaria is the most important parasitic disease in the world, with a long history of control programmes. According to the latest estimates of the WHO 300-500 million people suffer from malaria annually in over 107 countries and over 1 million (mostly children under 5) lose their lives due to the disease. Ease of travel at present, occurrence of resistance of malaria parasite to common anti malarial drugs, emergence of vector resistance to pesticides, natural disasters, rapid environmental change caused by natural resources development (dams, irrigation schemes), wars, humanitarian crises and global warming have all contributed to the intensification of malaria and to its return to areas where it had been eliminated, even after many years.

The incidence of malaria is influenced by changes in land use, deforestation and urbanization of tropical and temperate forest lands. New transmission of this disease is occurring as the result of population movement across borders. These imported cases add to the burden of the local health system significantly and contribute mainly to the local transmission of the disease. It is estimated that around 1800 billion dollars are spent annually to control malaria worldwide. At the Third Conference of the Parties of the Stockholm Convention 8COP3), held in Dakar, Senegal (30 April – 4 May 2007), participants learned that DDT production and use is again rising rapidly.

Agricultural pests often present a significant challenge to agricultural production and food security. Pests that can affect production include insects, mites, rodents, viruses, fungi, bacteria and weeds. Use of pesticides often has become the primary response to occurrence of such pests. Subsequently, agricultural dependence on pesticides has steadily increased since their introduction. Each year more than 2 million metric tons of pesticide products are used to control pests and diseases. While pesticides often play a role in food and agricultural production, their use also tends to have adverse effects on human health and the environment. Regulatory control of pesticides to protect human health and the environment, and its enforcement, remains weak in many countries.

Pesticide use affects a large number of people around the world through acute poisoning and through chronic health effects due to long-term exposure. Current figures are not known. An international study conducted by the WHO in 1995 estimated that approximately 3 million cases of acute pesticide poisonings occurred annually, including 220,000 pesticide related deaths, mainly among those who use and apply pesticides improperly. However, over the last 12 years since this estimate was published pesticide use has escalated dramatically, especially in development countries where most of the poisonings occur, and it is probably that the current level of poisoning is significantly higher than the 1995 figure from WHO, in which underreporting was viewed as a significant difficulty. The most commonly recognised types of acute pesticide-poisoning result from all exposures (dermal absorption, inhalation or ingestion). This is especially true among farmers and agricultural workers. Families of agriculture workers and the surrounding communities have also been identified as populations at risk. In addition, there is a range of chronic effects that in most cases are not well recognized and difficult to link to particular substances.

In humans, pesticides affect the nervous, immune, reproductive, cardiovascular and endocrine systems, and may cause cancer. Recent research indicate that some pesticides disrupt the body’s endocrine system (the sex glands and hormones) and target cells that help control growth, development, reproduction and behaviour. Children, in particular, are more susceptible to pesticides for various reasons: they are still developing, have faster metabolisms, can be involved in play activities that increase their exposure, and have different food patterns that can lead to much higher intake per unit of body weight.

Pesticides also have significant impacts on wildlife and the environment. Contamination of water resources with pesticide residues, including ground and surface water, is widespread. Residues of persistent pesticides are also detected in rain and snow, and in vegetation far from where they have been used. The full and long-term impact on human health and the environment is only partially understood while new concerns continue to arise.

Besides agriculture, pest problems can also occur in situations as diverse as houses and apartments, food handling facilities, storage areas, schools and hospitals, child care centres, road and roadside maintenance, parks, gardens, clothes and in forests.

In order to reduce the adverse effects of pesticides on human health and ecosystems, and to maintain their effectiveness in pest control, new approaches to managing pests and vector born diseases were developed. These new approaches rely less on pesticides and more on a set of integrated measures that reduce pest pressure and better control vectors. These approaches are known as Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Integrated Vector Management (IVM) and are introduced below.

3. Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

IPM developed in response to high pesticide use and concerns about its health and environmental effects.

Instead of simply trying to eradicate a pest by using pesticides, an integrated pest management approach aims to keep pest populations in check “through the careful consideration of all available pest control techniques and subsequent integration of appropriate measures that discourage the development of pest populations and keep pesticides and other interventions to levels that are economically justified and reduce or minimize risks to human health and the environment. IPM emphasizes the growth of a healthy crop with the least disruption to agro-ecosystems and encourages natural pest control mechanisms” (UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) definition of Integrated Pest Management (IPM)).

IPM analyses the life-cycle and ecology of pests and its interactions with the crop, and then uses this knowledge to minimize pest damage to the crop through agronomic interventions or other non- chemical techniques that suppress the development of pest or disease.

IPM Programmes in all parts of the world, and for a broad range of crops, have demonstrated that pesticide use levels generally can be reduced considerably without affecting production.

Several IPM programmes in Asia developed with support of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) provide important examples to other countries. In the 1980s, Asia’s rice production was threatened by the brown plant hopper (BPH). Indonesia requested FAO assistance to help solve the problem. FAO’s response was based on the ecological finding (since the 1970s) that the indiscriminate use of pesticides was actually causing the BPH to become a serious threat to rice. Indonesia’s Presidential Decree in 1986 announced the implementation of a national IPM programme in Indonesia and the ban of 57 formulations of rice pesticides. This national IPM programme began an innovative farmer education programme that entailed a season long experiential learning by farmers to understand the ecology of the rice fields. These Farmer Field Schools (FFS) included experiments, field observations, and group analysis. The knowledge gained from the FFS enabled farmers to make their own locally specific decisions about crop management practices. This approach was radically different from earlier IPM extension programmes in which farmers were given instructions from specialists from outside the community. The success of the IPM Programme in Indonesia – no major BPH outbreaks in over 20 years and over 35% reduction in rice insecticide use with growing rice production - contributed to the rapid spread of the FFS approach for rice IPM to other countries, and was followed by a spread to other crops. The FFS approach has proven useful not only to educate farmers on IPM, but also to enable farmers to better participate, dialogue and make joint decisions to deal with issues and problems.

Specific IPM techniques include crop rotation, biological controls, resistant varieties of plants, pheromones to attract beneficial insects, efficiently targeted spraying, and other methods. IPM reduces the adverse impact on the environment and human health from the use of pesticides and generally helps reduce production costs because less needs to be spent on costly chemicals. In addition, there are clear economic benefits to the public in the form of reduced costs to human health and the environment.

4. Integrated Vector Management

Control of vector borne diseases is a complex and multifaceted problem. In the initial days of disease management there was a focus on vector control, culminating in the Global Malaria Eradication programme in the 1950s and 1960s, after that vector control lost considerable ground with the development of new drugs and the extension of the primary health care system which promoted case detection and treatment. Vector control is now in many instances quite marginal, as reflected in the resources allocated to it. This is also complicated by the fact that controversy still exists over the adverse health and environmental effects of persistent organic pollutants found in some of these insecticides. Even though an integrated multi-sectoral approach to the management of vector borne diseases which includes development programmes, such as irrigated agriculture, hydroelectric dam construction, road building, forest clearance, housing development and industrial expansion, could be successful at controlling vectors, opportunities for cooperation and for adoption of strategies other than those based on insecticides are seldom grasped.

There is however, a strong and compelling reason for public health professionals to rely on indoor spraying with residual insecticides. In the epidemiology of most vector-borne diseases (but most apparent in the case of malaria), the linear relationship between vector density and disease transmission exists only at low levels of transmission. At high levels of transmission, even reductions in the vector population density by several orders of magnitude will not have an impact on the transmission. Environmental management and biological control methods that are effective in situations of low transmission intensity, will have little effect in areas with high levels of transmission. Indoor residual spraying, by contrast, reduces vector longevity, a key determinant of vectorial capacity. In simple terms: the longer a vector lives on the average, the greater the risk of disease transmission. Killing mosquitoes after their first blood meal therefore reduced the transmission risk to zero. Obviously this only works in places where mosquitoes bite indoors, rest indoors after taking a blood meal and where they have not developed resistance to the insecticide in question.

IVM is a rational decision-making process for the optimal use of resources for vector control (WHO definition, December 2007). The attributes of IVM are described in the WHO publication: Global Strategic Framework for Integrated Vector Management (2004)1:

Box 2 Attributes of IVM

"Integrated vector management is a process for managing vector populations in such a way as to reduce or interrupt transmission of disease. Characteristic features of IVM include:

• methods based on knowledge of factors influencing local vector biology, disease transmission and morbidity; • use of a range of interventions, often in combination and synergistically; • collaboration within the health sector and with other public and private sectors that impact on vectors; • engagement with local communities and other stakeholders; • a public health regulatory and legislative framework.

An IVM-based process should be cost-effective, should have indicators for monitoring efficacy with respect to impact on vector populations and disease transmission, and should employ sustainable approaches compatible with local health systems. It should also allow effective planning and decision-making to take place at the lowest possible administrative levels (subsidiarity). …...

1 Global Strategic Framework for Integrated Vector Management (2004; WHO/CDS/CPE/PVC/2004.10) - section 3. (http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2004/WHO_CDS_CPE_PVC_2004_10.pdf )

While this definition may seem rather reductionist, it captures the spirit of IVM. It is further clarified by reviewing a number of attributes of IVM:

Cost-effectiveness. At the core of the IVM concept is the need to obtain maximum value for money. Like most health sector programmes, vector control has to operate within serious budget constraints. This implies that the vector control measures selected to be part of an IVM package need to be tested for their cost-effectiveness, both individually and, taking into account possible synergies, collectively. For this reason, IVM programmes must have the capacity to carry out cost-effectiveness analyses in a correct way.

An implication of this attribute is, that vector control programmes must define the health-based targets they are working towards with their IVM approach, within a clear time frame. Such targets must reflect the vector-borne disease control situation, and they must also reflect what can be achieved realistically within the national or local context. The targets are the basis for composing the IVM programme content and they serve as indicators for the monitoring activities.

Intersectoral action. The environmental and social determinants of health are constantly changed by decision-making that takes place outside of the health sector. Irrigation schemes changes environmental receptivity for vectors, new transport infrastructure allow parasites and vectors to travel greater distances, population resettlement will introduce parasite carries in receptive areas, or will expose non- immunes to parasite transmission by vectors. There are ample opportunities, in the context of IVM, to include measures by other sectors that help reduce transmission risks, through project design, implementation and operation. Moreover, in other, economically productive sectors, available resources are often orders of magnitude larger than those available in the health sector.

The intersectoral framework within which IVM has to operate also underscores the fact that IVM should be made up of regulatory and operational measures. Traditionally, vector control professionals have been very operations oriented. However, lessons learned from the environment sector show that often results can be achieved much more effectively and efficiently by regulating the actions of others. Establishing standards and norms backed up by sound legislation gives vector control programmes a strong instrument to engage others in the IVM operations. This is exemplified by the success of dengue vector control in Singapore in the 1980s.

Subsidiarity. Vertical vector control programmes, often exclusively based on chemical interventions, have a top-down structure and often are challenged by the need to obtain the cooperation of local communities. In IVM, the involvement of local communities is a critical element. Therefore, the concept of subsidiarity is a key component of IVM: it foresees decision-making at the lowest possible levels (i.e. any decision-making higher up in the administrative structure than strictlly necessary is subsidiary to local decision-making).

Decision-making on vector control actions at the lowest possible level makes it necessary to use criteria that are relevant to the local eco-epidemiological setting, and to include only those vector control measures into the IVM packages that can be locally applied. Clearly, not all necessary expertise can be available at all times at all places, and therefore a regional or national core group will be able to provide technical support to the local vector control operators. Similarly, independent quality control of vector control operations will also be required to ensure that the health-based targets set for the IVM programme are met in an optimal way. Responsibility for such quality control can be efficiently placed at the administrative mid-level, i.e. for example with the provincial authorities.

Ecosystem context. Vector-borne diseases are uniquely linked to the environment, through the specific ecological requirements of vector species. It is therefore critical that the initiation of an IVM-based vector control programme begins with an in-depth ecosystem analysis which reveals all options for environmental, biological and chemical control of vectors. Such an analysis should be repeated periodically to account for changes over time, and it should also be part of any impact assessment of planned development projects in the area.

Using the ecosystem as the basis for the design of an IVM approach also implies that there is a certain hierarchical order by which the building blocks of the control programme (i.e. the individual measures) are put together. The extent to which this hierarchy is built up will depend on the health-based targets

7 Lead sponsors: IFCS/FSC WG IVP & IPM/03 Islamic Republic of Iran (N. Heidari) and PANAP (S. Rengam) Forum VI Thought Starter Version 2/ FINAL Draft 12 February 2008 defined by the programme management. It is first modelled to what extent the targets can be met on the basis of environmental management approaches (environmental modification and environmental manipulation), followed by biological control activities (first predators and parasites, then biological toxins) and finally chemical interventions (larviciding and IRS). At all times the cost-effectiveness of the different options for combinations needs to be tested.

Sustainability. In a natural resource context, sustainability as defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) refers to inter-generational equity: the current generation should use natural resources to fulfil their needs in a way that will permit future generations to equally use them to fulfil their own needs. Clearly, this also has a bearing on vector control, when it comes to possible environmental modification, to the impact of the application of insecticides and the introduction of new species as predators of vectors in stable ecosystems. In addition, there is the need for vector control to maintain an economic sustainability. One of the weaknesses of the global efforts to eradicate malaria through the use of indoor residual spraying was that it could only be a time-limited effort, because the level of investment required would be impossible to sustain as an open-ended commitment. This in fact led to the premature reduction in activities and the re-channelling of vector control resources to other health sector priorities before the outcome of the effort was fully consolidated.

"An additional and key impetus to the adoption of IVM arises out of the need to ensure the sound management and judicious use of insecticides, as requested by the World Health Assembly and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. This has led to a reappraisal of the strategy for vector control and a commitment to the development of effective measures that reduce risk and are compatible with protection of the environment and sustainable development. Such a commitment requires an approach that effectively integrates the roles of the various sectors, including health, within a strategic management framework.

An IVM approach takes into account the available health infrastructure and resources and integrates all available and effective measures, whether chemical, biological or environmental. IVM also encourages effective coordination of the control activities of all sectors that have an impact on vector borne diseases, including health, water, solid waste and sewage disposal, housing and agriculture. Commensurate benefits for non-health-sector partners make it more likely that IVM approaches will be effective. ….. ….. While IVM emphasizes effective systems and action at the local level, the support of nationwide programmes is essential for major diseases such as malaria, dengue and filariasis. These programmes will be required to provide technical advice on vector-borne disease epidemiology, surveillance and control technologies, and to provide adequate systems for programme monitoring and quality control. However, successful vector control programmes need more than just expertise in vector control technologies — they also need expertise in planning and programme management. The requisite skills remain scarce, particularly in the resource-poor countries that are most in need of effective vector- borne disease control. A massive effort will be required to build the capacity to address these various facets of IVM."

Global Strategic Framework for Integrated Vector Management (2004; WHO/CDS/CPE/PVC/2004.10) section 3. (http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2004/WHO_CDS_CPE_PVC_2004_10.pdf )

Additionally, implementation of IPM and IVM will result in the reduction of the pressure of the development of insecticide resistance, thus helping to ensure that pesticides are effective when absolutely required. It is particular important to maintain the effectiveness of pesticides with low hazards.

An example of a relevant national programme is the "Make Zambia Clean and Healthy" launched in June 2007 by the national government. The programme aims to make cities, towns and villages healthier places to live. For some years now communities have experienced constant outbreaks of communicable diseases, such as malaria and cholera. This is mainly due to a lack of safe water supply,

8 Lead sponsors: IFCS/FSC WG IVP & IPM/03 Islamic Republic of Iran (N. Heidari) and PANAP (S. Rengam) Forum VI Thought Starter Version 2/ FINAL Draft 12 February 2008 inadequate environmental sanitation, inappropriate personal hygiene and eating habits combined with low levels of knowledge of basic environmental health and hygiene matters. The "Make Zambia Clean and Healthy" programme is a government led, multi disciplinary, multi sectoral, environmental campaign programme in which government authorities at all levels work together with public sector institutes, church organizations, and individuals to carry out a wide range of activities. The work promotes personal hygiene, garbage collection, provision of clean and safe water and sanitation, and general cleanliness of the living environment and communities.

5. Goals and objectives of the plenary session

The overarching goal is to reduce adverse environmental and human health effects resulting from the use of pesticides in pest and disease vector management through the adoption and implementation of IPM and IVM, while ensuring that there are no adverse impacts on the vector-borne disease situation, or preferably, that the burden of vector-borne diseases is further reduced in a sustainable way.

To achieve this goal, policies and strategies are needed to promote IPM and IVM at global, regional and national levels. Importantly, it should be recognized that policies to promote IPM and IVM are consistent with and supportive of the Millennium Development Goals of poverty reduction, combating malaria and other diseases as well as ensuring environmental sustainability. Governments and international bodies that fund development projects should accept and follow the principles inherent in IPM and IVM.

There is a need for global support to strengthen IPM and IVM through policy reform, capacity building, and education. There is a need for countries and regions around the world to take the necessary legislative and/or administrative measures to achieve pesticide risk reduction through reduced use of chemical insecticides and selection of less hazardous products when use of pesticides is deemed justified. Replacement of pesticides by environmentally and ecologically friendly measures such as biological control and environment management, are an important element of strategies to reduce reliance on pesticides.

The purpose of the session at Forum VI is to support and encourage governments, intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations and the private sector to strengthen the role of IPM and IVM in pesticide risk reduction strategies, while maintaining the potential for agricultural pest and vector-borne disease control. IFCS can make a distinct and added contribution to the global efforts to mainstream IPM and IVM to help eradicate communicable diseases and manage pests in a sustainable manner. Sessions of the Forum provide a non-bureaucratic participatory, multi-stakeholder and multi- sectoral, transparent and inclusive mechanism for discussing issues of common interest and also new and emerging issues in the area of sound management of chemicals.

The plenary session at Forum VI supports the implementation of SAICM Global Plan of Action2 activities 29, 50 and 159 which are extensions of the IFCS Priority for Action beyond 2000 (D1)3 and Forum IV recommendations on acutely toxic pesticides4.

Furthermore, this topic is cross-cutting with other issues IFCS has focused on, including the role of the sound management of chemicals and poverty reduction, the widening gap, illegal traffic, and children and chemical safety.

Therefore the overall objectives of the session are: - describe the key features of ecologically sound pest management through IPM and IVM; - provide information on existing IPM and IVM programmes; - provide information on various stakeholders, programmes and activities contributing to implementing best practices in IPM and IVM; - describe case studies of successful implementation of IPM and IVM;

2 http://www.chem.unep.ch/saicm/SAICM%20texts/SAICM%20documents.htm 3 http://www.who.int/ifcs/documents/forums/forum3/en/index.html 4 http://www.who.int/ifcs/documents/forums/forum4/final_report/en/index.html

- identify opportunities and challenges for broader application of IPM and IVM; - consider policy and institutional impediments and how these could be addressed; - consider ways and means to strengthen inter-sectoral collaboration and regional and international cooperation.

Plenary presentations will address the following areas: - Overview on existing programmes to promote IVM and IPM including best practices and roles of different sectors - Identifying and addressing institutional and policy impediments - Knowledge management and gaps in knowledge - Emerging issues and challenges - Ways and means to broaden use of IVM - Ways and means to broaden use of IPM - New developments: initial findings of a pilot project to combine IVM with IPM in a community based approach (Sri Lanka experience) - Capacity challenges for implementation at different levels (eg. government, farmers, industry)

Implementation of IVM and IPM will face issues, challenges and opportunities that vary depending on the stage of a country's development (developed countries, developing countries and countries in economic transition). Each of the presenters will be asked to address these differences that need to be taken into account.

6. Issues that could be considered by the Forum

There is strong and broad evidence that IPM and IVM offer valid alternatives that help reduce pesticide use in pest management and vector control. Pesticide use reduction is considered the first step in pesticide risk reduction. What are the drivers for IPM and IVM and how can these be harnessed to accelerate the broad adoption of IPM and IVM?

One issue to be considered is how a concerted approach, with involvement of all relevant sectors, to promote institutionalizing and mainstreaming of IPM and IVM approaches in programme and policy development can be supported. Not only in programmes and polices directly related to pest management or disease control, but also in broader policies related to chemicals management, environmental health, food safety, sustainable agricultural and rural development, Millennium Development Goals, etc.

In order to achieve the mainstreaming of IPM and IVM consideration can be given to identifying opportunities for broader application of these management approaches. Successful mainstreaming will require identifying and addressing the policy and institutional impediments that continue to prevent a broader uptake of IPM and IVM at a local, national, regional and international level. What policy tools are needed to address these impediments e.g.: identification of direct and indirect subsidies for pesticide use, how these affect IPM and IVM, and how these can be addressed? In this, it may be helpful also to identify policy and institutional settings that have assisted with the uptake and implementation of IPM and IVM already.

How can sectoral barriers in international policy development mechanisms be overcome? IPM is in the agricultural domain and IVM in the health domain, while key international instruments as the Stockholm Convention and SAICM are largely in the environmental domain. Particularly at the national level, there is a need for a pro-active approach to involve the agriculture and health sectors in the preparation and implementation of initiatives under the Stockholm Convention and SAICM. How can current barriers be reduced? How can inter-sectoral collaboration and regional and international cooperation be strengthened drawing on the experiences of farmers, communities, CSOs, FAO and others involved in successfully, or unsuccessfully, implementing IPM and IVM approaches to pest and diseases vector management?

Box 4 Specific elements to be considered:

 Problem analysis, needs assessment and priority setting on cross-border collaboration on pest and vector control;

 Capacity building for field-evidence-based decision taking on pest or vector management interventions;

 Developing skills for intersectoral negotiation and decision-making;

 Supporting the formulation of national IVM policies and the creation of institutional arrangements that support IVM programmes;

 Public awareness on health and environmental aspects of pest and vector control policies and operations to facilitate high community participation in IPM and IVM;

 Provide guidance on applied research on IPM and IVM;

 Provide guidance on monitoring and evaluation of IPM and IVM measures through countries, regional and global capacity building, training and technology transfer;

 Provide guidance on financial and other resources needed for IPM and IVM;

 Guidance on how to contribute to the reduction of the risks to the human health and environment through management of pest and vector born diseases transmission in a sustainable, cost effective and environmentally friendly manner;

 Support implementation of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides, with special attention to paragraphs related to IPM and IVM;

 Participatory and empowerment approaches; and

 Providing broad access to non-chemical alternatives.

7. Possible Forum Actions

The Forum may wish to consider and agree on actions and recommendations to enable progress in implementing IPM and IVM. These recommendations and action would be prepared by an ad hoc working group established during Forum VI. The agreed actions and recommendations could be brought forward to other international bodies addressing the sound management of chemicals, in particular the second session in 2009 of the International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM2) overseeing the implementation of the strategic approach to international chemicals management (SAICM).