IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ssefpa/v15y2023i6d10.1007_s12571-023-01402-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sharing decision-making tools for pest management may foster implementation of Integrated Pest Management

Author

Listed:
  • Vittorio Rossi

    (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Piacenza)

  • Tito Caffi

    (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Piacenza)

  • Irene Salotti

    (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Piacenza)

  • Giorgia Fedele

    (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Piacenza)

Abstract

Agriculture needs to reduce its current dependence toward pesticides while reducing crop losses caused by pests and ensuring food security; Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is considered the most appropriate approach to achieve the goal. More specifically, growers should use tools that enable informed decisions on whether and when crop protection is needed, and which methods should be used. These tools include risk algorithms, decision rules, intervention thresholds, and decision support systems (DSSs), collectively named decision tools (DTs). A large number of DTs have been developed and made available to advisors and farmers, mainly through Internet-based systems. The adoption rate of these systems, however, has been low because of technical limitations and farmer perceptions. Fragmentation of the DTs offered, poor local implementation, and restriction to particular users are among the causes for low adoption. If properly mobilised, the use and effects of DTs could substantially be increased. Sharing of IPM DTs has a strong potential for providing wider access to the existing knowledge, for fostering IPM implementation, and for supporting plant health policies. In this article, we outline an overall approach to develop a web-based platform, in which DTs are shared and made widely available. Such a platform can include a range of ready-to-use DTs, i.e. DTs which are currently available, that have been field-validated, and which are already being used in some agricultural contexts. The platform also provides open, full documentation of DTs, makes DTs available for validation and adaptation in different agricultural contexts, and makes DTs easily available for multiple kinds of end-users involved in IPM (farmers, IPM experts, public and private information and service providers, and policy makers). We also consider how DT sharing can reduce both the technological and behavioural limitations of existing plant health management systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Vittorio Rossi & Tito Caffi & Irene Salotti & Giorgia Fedele, 2023. "Sharing decision-making tools for pest management may foster implementation of Integrated Pest Management," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(6), pages 1459-1474, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ssefpa:v:15:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s12571-023-01402-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s12571-023-01402-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12571-023-01402-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12571-023-01402-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hochman, Z. & Carberry, P.S., 2011. "Emerging consensus on desirable characteristics of tools to support farmers' management of climate risk in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(6), pages 441-450, July.
    2. Kuehne, Geoff & Llewellyn, Rick & Pannell, David J. & Wilkinson, Roger & Dolling, Perry & Ouzman, Jackie & Ewing, Mike, 2017. "Predicting farmer uptake of new agricultural practices: A tool for research, extension and policy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 115-125.
    3. Igbaria, M & Guimaraes, T, 1994. "Empirically testing the outcomes of user involvement in DSS development," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 157-172, March.
    4. Rose, David C. & Sutherland, William J. & Parker, Caroline & Lobley, Matt & Winter, Michael & Morris, Carol & Twining, Susan & Ffoulkes, Charles & Amano, Tatsuya & Dicks, Lynn V., 2016. "Decision support tools for agriculture: Towards effective design and delivery," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 165-174.
    5. Teng, P. S. & Savary, S., 1992. "Implementing the systems approach in pest management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 237-264.
    6. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    7. Łopatka, Artur & Koza, Piotr & Siebielec, Grzegorz & Łysiak, Magdalena, 2016. "The division of Europe into regions with similar potential effectiveness and environmental consequences of pesticide application based on expert inclusive research," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 129-142.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ara, Iffat & Turner, Lydia & Harrison, Matthew Tom & Monjardino, Marta & deVoil, Peter & Rodriguez, Daniel, 2021. "Application, adoption and opportunities for improving decision support systems in irrigated agriculture: A review," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 257(C).
    2. Dolinska, Aleksandra & Hassenforder, Emeline & Loboguerrero, Ana Maria & Sultan, Benjamin & Bossuet, Jérôme & Cottenceau, Jeanne & Bonatti, Michelle & Hellin, Jon & Mekki, Insaf & Drogoul, Alexis & Va, 2023. "Co-production opportunities seized and missed in decision-support frameworks for climate-change adaptation in agriculture – How do we practice the “best practice”?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    3. Gary Bentrup & Michael G. Dosskey, 2022. "Tree Advisor: A Novel Woody Plant Selection Tool to Support Multifunctional Objectives," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, March.
    4. So Pyay Thar & Thiagarajah Ramilan & Robert J. Farquharson & Deli Chen, 2021. "Identifying Potential for Decision Support Tools through Farm Systems Typology Analysis Coupled with Participatory Research: A Case for Smallholder Farmers in Myanmar," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, June.
    5. Sophia Xiaoxia Duan & Santoso Wibowo & Josephine Chong, 2021. "A Multicriteria Analysis Approach for Evaluating the Performance of Agriculture Decision Support Systems for Sustainable Agribusiness," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Sun, Yong & Miao, Yiling & Xie, Zhiju & Wu, Runtian, 2024. "Drivers and barriers to digital transformation in agriculture: An evolutionary game analysis based on the experience of China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    7. Rodríguez-Barillas, María & Klerkx, Laurens & Poortvliet, P. Marijn, 2024. "What determines the acceptance of Climate Smart Technologies? The influence of farmers' behavioral drivers in connection with the policy environment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    8. Phelan, David C. & Harrison, Matthew T. & McLean, Greg & Cox, Howard & Pembleton, Kieth G. & Dean, Geoff J. & Parsons, David & do Amaral Richter, Maria E. & Pengilley, Georgie & Hinton, Sue J. & Moham, 2018. "Advancing a farmer decision support tool for agronomic decisions on rainfed and irrigated wheat cropping in Tasmania," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 113-124.
    9. Lundström, Christina & Lindblom, Jessica, 2018. "Considering farmers' situated knowledge of using agricultural decision support systems (AgriDSS) to Foster farming practices: The case of CropSAT," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 9-20.
    10. Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Jordan Chamberlin & Miet Maertens, 2020. "Design of Digital Agricultural Extension Tools: Perspectives from Extension Agents in Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 798-815, September.
    11. Kragt, Marit Ellen & Llewellyn, Rick S., 2013. "Using choice experiments to improve the design of weed decision support tools," Working Papers 147031, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    12. Rose, David C. & Sutherland, William J. & Parker, Caroline & Lobley, Matt & Winter, Michael & Morris, Carol & Twining, Susan & Ffoulkes, Charles & Amano, Tatsuya & Dicks, Lynn V., 2016. "Decision support tools for agriculture: Towards effective design and delivery," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 165-174.
    13. Oyinbo, Oyakhilomen & Chamberlin, Jordan & Vanlauwe, Bernard & Vranken, Liesbet & Kamara, Yaya Alpha & Craufurd, Peter & Maertens, Miet, 2019. "Farmers' preferences for high-input agriculture supported by site-specific extension services: Evidence from a choice experiment in Nigeria," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 12-26.
    14. Oscar Montes de Oca Munguia & Rick Llewellyn, 2020. "The Adopters versus the Technology: Which Matters More when Predicting or Explaining Adoption?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 80-91, March.
    15. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Locating agricultural decision support systems in the troubled past and socio-technical complexity of `models for management'," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 11-25, October.
    16. Shang, Linmei & Heckelei, Thomas & Gerullis, Maria K. & Börner, Jan & Rasch, Sebastian, 2021. "Adoption and diffusion of digital farming technologies - integrating farm-level evidence and system interaction," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    17. Mohamed Ghali & Maha Ben Jaballah & Nejla Ben Arfa & Annie Sigwalt, 2022. "Analysis of factors that influence adoption of agroecological practices in viticulture," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 179-209, September.
    18. Hidalgo, Francisco & Quiñones-Ruiz, Xiomara F. & Birkenberg, Athena & Daum, Thomas & Bosch, Christine & Hirsch, Patrick & Birner, Regina, 2023. "Digitalization, sustainability, and coffee. Opportunities and challenges for agricultural development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    19. Eom, Sean B, 1998. "The Intellectual Development and Structure of Decision Support Systems (1991-1995)," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 639-657, October.
    20. Walterscheid, Heinz & Vetschera, Rudolf & Hoffmann, Gunnar, 1994. "Die Entwicklung und Bewertung von managementunterstützenden Informationssystemen: Eine empirische Anwenderstudie," Discussion Papers, Series I 275, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ssefpa:v:15:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s12571-023-01402-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.