ABSTRACT

Ralf Nauen and Thomas Bretschneider of Bayer Crop Science AG,

Research, based at Monheim in Germany outline the development of
new insecticides based on novel modes of action.

BY THE CONDITION OF NEPAL,

Nepal is an agrarian country whose population is primarily dependent on
agriculture but the contribution to national Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) is low as expected. There are many constraints to agricultural crop
production and the farmers are facing those problems in their day-to-day
lives. Deployment of insecticides and others to mitigate various insects
and pests is one of them. Although abundant with locally available plant
resources for pest management, farmers, especially in commercial pocket
areas, are primarily dependent on conventional pesticides and those
chemicals have detrimental effects on human health, including various
flora, fauna, and environment. . Although the Nepal government has
formulated an act and worked on that basis, there is plenty of room to
work on. Since farmer knowledge and behavior have a positive impact on
reducing the use of conventional insecticides and work on alternative
prioritized by the Government of Nepal and measures for pest
management, these sorts of programs should be its allied agricultural
organization
 OBSERVATION
 By getting the research on we found that the medicine which we are
using in the plant are causing harmful to human beings.
 Pesticides can cause short-term adverse health effects, called acute
effects, as well as chronic adverse effects that can occur months or
years after exposure. Examples of acute health effects include
stinging eyes, rashes, blisters, blindness, nausea, dizziness, diarrhea
and death. Examples of known chronic effects are cancers, birth
defects, reproductive harm, immunotoxicity, neurological and
developmental toxicity,  and disruption of the endocrine system.
 Some people are more vulnerable than others to pesticide impacts.
For example, infants and young children are known to be more
susceptible than adults to the toxic effects of pesticides. Farm
workers and pesticide applicators are also more vulnerable because
they receive greater exposures.

Some Health Effects Are Listed Below:

 Chronic(Long-Term)Health Effects
Chronic health effects include cancer and other tumors; brain and
nervous system damage; birth defects; infertility and other
reproductive problems; and damage to the liver, kidneys, lungs and
other body organs.
 Acute(Immediate)Health Effects
Immediate health effects from pesticide exposure includes
irritation of the nose, throat, and skin causing burning, stinging and
itching as well as rashes and blisters. Nausea, dizziness and
diarrhea are also common. People with asthma may have very
severe reactions to some pesticides, particularly
pyrethrin/pyrethroid, organophosphate and carbamate pesticides.
Sssss
about the methods of pest management other than chemicals. But, the
Nepal Government and Department of Agriculture have started to
prioritize the IPM program. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a pest
control strategy that aims to combine various techniques of pest
management such as mechanical, physical, cultural, biological, and
chemical to minimize the risks possessed by the pest in a given ecosystem.
IPM always considers the use of chemicals as a last resort and before
using chemicals, it seeks out all the possible alternatives for insect pest
management.
Since 1999, the Nepalese government has used the Farmer Field School
approach to strengthen farmers for cultivating healthy crops with decisions
based on an understanding of the field agroecosystem with having eyes on
beneficial organisms such as predators and parasites of insect pests. A
Farmer Field School, also known as a school without walls, is a school
that teaches basic agroecology and crop management skills. A group of
farmers gathers in one of their own fields to observe, discuss, record, and
analyze real-world field problems from crop planting to harvest. This field
school is based on the concept of “learning by doing” rather than “seeing
is believing”. The FFS was specially designed for farmers to learn and
adopt IPM practices to their diverse and ever-changing ecological
conditions . Several crop season-long FFS have been organized in Nepal
in recent years to provide knowledge and know-how on IPM to vegetable
farmers in the hope of reducing their use of pesticides .
IPM farmer’s field schools in the country have positive impacts on the
farmers for using a lesser amount of pesticides. This was evident in the
Bhaktapur district of the country, which is also well known for
commercial vegetable production, and seasonal and off-seasonal
vegetables are produced here. As reported, farmers were using a
significantly higher amount of pesticides where mean active ingredient of
fungicides and insecticides were 2373 and 1963 g respectively and on
average use of pesticide use was 2011 . Among the used pesticides to
cruciferous vegetables, the share of insecticides was more, that is, 76%
which was followed by fungicides (19%) and unknown were 5%.
The participants of IPM farmer’s field school had reduced significantly
lower amounts of pesticides compared to non-participants. It was reported
the 36% lesser amount of pesticides due to the effect of participation of
IPM farmer’s field school . In another report, pesticide application by the
farmers was decreased by 40% upon participation in farmer’s field school.
This obviously shows the importance of these programs organized by
governmental institutions.

Lesson learned from other countries

It is speculated that the insecticide reduction will cause a decline in the
yield of the crops. But, it is not the case of the countries which are
following a reduction in pesticide use because of their focus on the
ecology of pests and agro -ecosystem. In that scenario, their production
has been affected as speculated. Sweden has reduced pesticide use by 68%
and public health poisonings by 77%. Their cutoff to the pesticides did not
cause increased crop losses by the various pest species including insects.
Indonesia also has reduced pesticide use by 65% and on the contrary, their
production of rice has increased by 12%. India is also practicing the same
and reducing the use significantly over the past years. But, Nepal is doing
the opposite . We are quite increasing the pesticide use for the sake of
higher production, but, we are not aware of the fact that we are using
unwarranted pesticides.
Farmers, the ones who are not trained with the Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) practices, are spraying the chemical pesticides more
often than the ones who are trained. It is found that the trained farmers are
spraying the pesticides 2.7 more times than the optimal whereas; the ones
who are not trained are spraying 4.4 times of control . This suggests the
need of organizing community-based IPM training and environmental
awareness programs about harmful effects of pesticides and sharing the
know-how of insect pest management other than chemicals. It is also
reported that Nepalese farmers are willing to pay higher prices (53–79%)
than the current pesticide costs to mitigate the detrimental effect on their
health and environment, and this clearly shows that they are willing to
adopt alternative measures of pest management. But, the IPM programs of
Nepal do have a contribution to the reduction of pesticide use but do not
have a significant contribution to the reduction of health damages
associated with the pesticides.
Since Nepali farmers do not have much more information and knowledge
about the methods of pest management other than chemicals. But, the
Nepal Government and Department of Agriculture have started to
prioritize the IPM program. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a pest
control strategy that aims to combine various techniques of pest
management such as mechanical, physical, cultural, biological, and
chemical to minimize the risks possessed by the pest in a given ecosystem.
IPM always considers the use of chemicals as a last resort and before
using chemicals, it seeks out all the possible alternatives for insect pest
management.
Since 1999, the Nepalese government has used the Farmer Field School
approach to strengthen farmers for cultivating healthy crops with decisions
based on an understanding of the field agroecosystem with having eyes on
beneficial organisms such as predators and parasites of insect pests. A
Farmer Field School, also known as a school without walls, is a school
that teaches basic agroecology and crop management skills. A group of
farmers gathers in one of their own fields to observe, discuss, record, and
analyze real-world field problems from crop planting to harvest. This field
school is based on the concept of “learning by doing” rather than “seeing
is believing”. The FFS was specially designed for farmers to learn and
adopt IPM practices to their diverse and ever-changing ecological
conditions . Several crop season-long FFS have been organized in Nepal
in recent years to provide knowledge and know-how on IPM to vegetable
farmers in the hope of reducing their use of pesticides .
IPM farmer’s field schools in the country have positive impacts on the
farmers for using a lesser amount of pesticides. This was evident in the
Bhaktapur district of the country, which is also well known for
commercial vegetable production, and seasonal and off-seasonal
vegetables are produced here. As reported, farmers were using a
significantly higher amount of pesticides where mean active ingredient of
fungicides and insecticides were 2373 and 1963 g respectively and on
average use of pesticide use was 2011 . Among the used pesticides to
cruciferous vegetables, the share of insecticides was more, that is, 76%
which was followed by fungicides (19%) and unknown were 5%.
The participants of IPM farmer’s field school had reduced significantly
lower amounts of pesticides compared to non-participants. It was reported
the 36% lesser amount of pesticides due to the effect of participation of
IPM farmer’s field school . In another report, pesticide application by the
farmers was decreased by 40% upon participation in farmer’s field school.
This obviously shows the importance of these programs organized by
governmental institutions.