000 03661nam a22004937a 4500
001 G77136
003 MX-TxCIM
005 20211006084742.0
008 121211s ||||f| 0 p|p||0|| |
020 _a970-648-104-4
040 _aMX-TxCIM
072 0 _aE16
072 0 _aH10
082 0 4 _a338.91
_bWAT
100 1 _aSiziba, S.
_uInternational conference on impacts of agricultural research and development: Why has impact assessment research not made more of a difference?; International Conference on Impacts of Agricultural Research and Development; San José (Costa Rica); 4-7 Feb 2002
110 0 _aCentro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo (CIMMYT), Mexico DF (Mexico)
245 0 0 _aA farm-level evaluation of the impact of IPM on pesticides use:
_b a comparative analysis of IPM and non-IPM trained farmers in Zimbabwe's smallholder sector
260 _aMexico, DF (Mexico)
_bCIMMYT :
_c2003
300 _ap. 83
340 _aPrinted
520 _aMost farmers in Zimbabwe are smallholders whose production systems are predominately subsistence based and in which maize accounts for over 65% of the cultivated area. In Zimbabwe, horticultural production has grown steadily, becoming an important additional source of income for smallholders, and farmers are being encouraged to diversify to the production of high value crops. Tomatoes account for about 60% of the land area allocated to horticultural crops.|Tomato production is vulnerable to pests and disease outbreaks. Currently, pest management in tomato production is characterized by a heavy dependence on chemical pesticides. These are viewed as a quick and easy solution to pest problems. In Zimbabwe and many developing countries, chemical pesticides have received much government support as a means of reducing crop losses. However, mounting evidence points up the negative effects of chemical pesticides on human health and the environment. Toxic substances can accumulate in the ecosystem and have a detrimental effect on non-target organisms. Integrated pest management (IPM) promotes the use of all known (biological and cultural) environmentally benign pest control measures. Farmers are encouraged to integrate the various methods so that chemicals are used minimally and judiciously. In Zimbabwe, IPM has not been widely promoted. Given the increasing cost of agricultural inputs in Zimbabwe, there could be scope for wider adoption of IPM.|This study presents a preliminary assessment of the impact of IPM technology on farmers' pest control practices, perceptions of chemical pesticides, and knowledge of non-chemical pest control alternatives.|The study involved a comparative analysis of 80 non- IPM trained smallholder tomato growers and 50 IPM trained smallholder tomato growers. The farmers were surveyed in 1999 in Chinamora communal area, a horticulture zone 50 km north of Harare.
536 _aSocioeconomics Program
546 _aEnglish
591 _a0310|AGRIS 0301|AL-Economics Program|R01PROCE
593 _aJuan Carlos Mendieta
594 _aINT2341
595 _aCPC
650 1 7 _aCrop yield
_gAGROVOC
_2
_91066
650 1 0 _aDeveloping Countries
650 1 0 _aFarmers
_gAGROVOC
_91654
650 1 0 _aHorticulture
650 1 7 _aMaize
_gAGROVOC
_2
_91173
650 1 0 _aPest control
650 1 0 _aPests of plants
_91201
650 1 0 _aProduction data
650 1 0 _aTomatoes
650 1 0 _aTraining programmes
650 1 0 _aZimbabwe
653 0 _aCIMMYT
653 0 _aIRRI
700 1 _9960
_aWatson, D.J.
_gResearch & Partnership Program
_8INT3479
_eed.
700 1 _9836
_aMekuria, M. M.
_gSocioeconomics Program
_8INT2341
942 _cPRO
999 _c6882
_d6882