Search results

This brief series was developed in preparation for the Foresight Breakout Session of the Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD 2012) and the Global Foresight Hub1 ; Times are changing for pest management in Europe. Stronger societal demands are putting pressure on farmers to reduce their reliance on pesticides. As a result, new legislation on pesticides recently came into force. !e diversity of available pesticides has been signi"cantly reduced and their use is increasingly restricted. Many in the crop protection community now wonder about the future of pest management. ENDURE, a European network of universities, research centers and extension groups, conducted a foresight study to provide crop protection stakeholders with the tools they need to proactively respond. !e study identi"es research needed to develop new solutions based on biological diversity, harmless chemicals, new technologies such as information and communications technology, nanotechnology and robotics, and economics, political sciences and the social dimension of innovation. But the study poses a new challenge to researchers: When building contrasting scenarios, researchers realized that the key drivers determining future crop protection strategies actually lie outside their traditional sphere of in#uence. To respond to the challenge, they need to engage with stakeholders outside research.

At the creation of the European Community in 1957, little attention was paid to environmental concerns. It's only in 1997, after decades of debate, that the 'Integration Principle' became formally engraved in European treaties. This principle, requiring all policies to take environmental concerns into account, represents a major landmark in the institutionalisation of environmental policy. Yet the effects of this integration appear unclear. So does its meaning. Does the Integration Principle ensure an effective impact of sustainable development institutions in Europe? We aim to answer this question by casting light on the origin and significance of the Integration Principle. We recapitulate the policy events leading to the formal integration of environmental concerns within EU policy since the 1970s. We highlight its gradual extension from a horizontal (cross-sectoral) to a vertical (cross-societal) dimension and stress the challenges posed by the necessary cross-societal integration of sustainable development policy. As a step toward answering the above question, our hypothesis is that the effectiveness of an institution depends on its integration not only across policy or economic sectors but also across governance levels. We derive implications with regard to the importance of learning to eco-innovation.

BACKGROUND: Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom have launched national initiatives to reduce pesticide use or risk. Faced with multiple environmental, social and economic constraints such as ensuring the competiveness of European agriculture, the various programmes address goal setting, stakeholder involvement and the role of research and extension in different ways. These diverse experiences offer valuable insights for the development of national action plans required by new European legislation on pesticides. RESULTS: The general trend is to move away from volume or use reduction targets towards reductions in risks and impact. All programmes studied pay attention to involving a wide range of stakeholders in the policy-making process to ensure buy-in. Research and extension services are important players that help to define appropriate goals and improve implementation. Collective approaches to implementation appear to be more effective than the classical linear research–extension–farmer model. CONCLUSION: No matter the approach adopted in fine, member states can gain much from sharing their diverse experience through comparisons such as this study and via international policy seminars which serve as valuable forums for exchange.

Times are changing for pest management in Europe. Stronger societal demands are putting pressure on farmers to reduce their reliance on pesticides. As a result, new legislation on pesticides recently came into force. !e diversity of available pesticides has been signi"cantly reduced and their use is increasingly restricted. Many in the crop protection community now wonder about the future of pest management. ENDURE, a European network of universities, research centers and extension groups, conducted a foresight study to provide crop protection stakeholders with the tools they need to proactively respond. !e study identi"es research needed to develop new solutions based on biological diversity, harmless chemicals, new technologies such as information and communications technology, nanotechnology and robotics, and economics, political sciences and the social dimension of innovation. But the study poses a new challenge to researchers: When building contrasting scenarios, researchers realized that the key drivers determining future crop protection strategies actually lie outside their traditional sphere of in#uence. To respond to the challenge, they need to engage with stakeholders outside research.

National audience ; L'eau est une ressource collective rare et précieuse, qu'il n'est pas toujours facile de partager sans provoquer de conflits entre les différents utilisateurs. Dans la région Poitou-Charentes, la situation de l'irrigation est un exemple typique des tensions qui peuvent exister entre le monde agricole et la société. Pour résoudre ces difficultés, un observatoire alliant système d'information et action collective a été mis en place. Dans cet article, les auteurs nous restituent l'analyse des perspectives et des attentes des acteurs ayant participé à l'élaboration de cet observatoire : responsables politiques, chercheurs et conseillers agricoles. Ils montrent ainsi l'intérêt de considérer la dimension sociale du problème pour impliquer davantage les acteurs et prendre en compte les contraintes locales, dans l'objectif de mettre en place une gestion concertée de la ressource en eau.

National audience ; L'eau est une ressource collective rare et précieuse, qu'il n'est pas toujours facile de partager sans provoquer de conflits entre les différents utilisateurs. Dans la région Poitou-Charentes, la situation de l'irrigation est un exemple typique des tensions qui peuvent exister entre le monde agricole et la société. Pour résoudre ces difficultés, un observatoire alliant système d'information et action collective a été mis en place. Dans cet article, les auteurs nous restituent l'analyse des perspectives et des attentes des acteurs ayant participé à l'élaboration de cet observatoire : responsables politiques, chercheurs et conseillers agricoles. Ils montrent ainsi l'intérêt de considérer la dimension sociale du problème pour impliquer davantage les acteurs et prendre en compte les contraintes locales, dans l'objectif de mettre en place une gestion concertée de la ressource en eau.

National audience ; L'eau est une ressource collective rare et précieuse, qu'il n'est pas toujours facile de partager sans provoquer de conflits entre les différents utilisateurs. Dans la région Poitou-Charentes, la situation de l'irrigation est un exemple typique des tensions qui peuvent exister entre le monde agricole et la société. Pour résoudre ces difficultés, un observatoire alliant système d'information et action collective a été mis en place. Dans cet article, les auteurs nous restituent l'analyse des perspectives et des attentes des acteurs ayant participé à l'élaboration de cet observatoire : responsables politiques, chercheurs et conseillers agricoles. Ils montrent ainsi l'intérêt de considérer la dimension sociale du problème pour impliquer davantage les acteurs et prendre en compte les contraintes locales, dans l'objectif de mettre en place une gestion concertée de la ressource en eau.

Agriculture in the twenty-first century faces the challenge of meeting food demands while satisfying sustainability goals. The challenge is further complicated by climate change which affects the distribution of crop pests (intended as insects, plants, and pathogenic agents injurious to crops) and the severity of their outbreaks. Increasing concerns over health and the environment as well as new legislation on pesticide use, particularly in the European Union, urge us to find sustainable alternatives to pesticide-based pest management. Here, we review the effect of climate change on crop protection and propose strategies to reduce the impact of future invasive as well as rapidly evolving resident populations. The major points are the following: (1) the main consequence of climate change and globalization is a heightened level of unpredictability of spatial and temporal interactions between weather, cropping systems, and pests; (2) the unpredictable adaptation of pests to a changing environment primarily creates uncertainty and projected changes do not automatically translate into doom and gloom scenarios; (3) faced with uncertainty, policy, research, and extension should prepare for worst-case scenarios following a "no regrets" approach that promotes resilience vis-A -vis pests which, at the biophysical level, entails uncovering what currently makes cropping systems resilient, while at the organizational level, the capacity to adapt needs to be recognized and strengthened; (4) more collective approaches involving extension and other stakeholders will help meet the challenge of developing more robust cropping systems; (5) farmers can take advantage of Web 2.0 and other new technologies to make the exchange of updated information quicker and easier; (6) cooperation between historically compartmentalized experts in plant health and crop protection could help develop anticipation strategies; and (7) the current decline in skilled crop protection specialists in Europe should be reversed, and shortcomings in local human and financial resources can be overcome by pooling resources across borders.

Climate change is increasingly perceived as one of the major constraints that limit agricultural productivity. Crop losses due to climate change could be direct, such as damages through flooding or storms, or indirect such as altered distribution of crop pests. The real impact of climate change at global level is yet uncertain and likely variable from one region to another. Within this context, it is difficult to predict effects of climate change, particularly when long-term datasets from the past are missing to develop and test predictive models for the future. Nevertheless, our knowledge of plant-disease interactions, population genetics of pathogens as well as crops, and examples of overwhelming establishment of new diseases in a given region provides insights into how climate change may affect disease incidence and severity. Here we report examples of pest populations which have been established across regions previously considered detrimental for their survival and yield losses associated to these pests. Faced with the uncertainty regarding the effects of changing climate on crop protection, here we propose a number of action points that, to our opinion, may help improve current plant protection strategies. Given this uncertainty, policy, research, and extension should be prepared to promote resilience vis-à-vis pests which, at the biophysical level, entails uncovering what currently makes cropping systems resilient, while at the organizational level, the capacity to adapt needs to be recognized and strengthened (Lamichhane et al 2014). Such action points include increase in human resources, development of resilient cropping systems, more focus on crop-weed competition, anticipating of risks and international monitoring, and more effort on breeding for resistance, development of biological control strategies and pest risks analysis. This diversification could be achieved by improving current plant protection practices which might help mitigate the effect of climate change in future crop protection, particularly in the EU, but also at global level. The vision presented here is that of the ENDURE European Research Group, which brings together some of Europe's leading agricultural research, teaching, and extension institutes with a special interest in IPM.

Climate change is increasingly perceived as one of the major constraints that limit agricultural productivity. Crop losses due to climate change could be direct, such as damages through flooding or storms, or indirect such as altered distribution of crop pests. The real impact of climate change at global level is yet uncertain and likely variable from one region to another. Within this context, it is difficult to predict effects of climate change, particularly when long-term datasets from the past are missing to develop and test predictive models for the future. Nevertheless, our knowledge of plant-disease interactions, population genetics of pathogens as well as crops, and examples of overwhelming establishment of new diseases in a given region provides insights into how climate change may affect disease incidence and severity. Here we report examples of pest populations which have been established across regions previously considered detrimental for their survival and yield losses associated to these pests. Faced with the uncertainty regarding the effects of changing climate on crop protection, here we propose a number of action points that, to our opinion, may help improve current plant protection strategies. Given this uncertainty, policy, research, and extension should be prepared to promote resilience vis-à-vis pests which, at the biophysical level, entails uncovering what currently makes cropping systems resilient, while at the organizational level, the capacity to adapt needs to be recognized and strengthened (Lamichhane et al 2014). Such action points include increase in human resources, development of resilient cropping systems, more focus on crop-weed competition, anticipating of risks and international monitoring, and more effort on breeding for resistance, development of biological control strategies and pest risks analysis. This diversification could be achieved by improving current plant protection practices which might help mitigate the effect of climate change in future crop protection, particularly in the EU, but also at global level. The vision presented here is that of the ENDURE European Research Group, which brings together some of Europe's leading agricultural research, teaching, and extension institutes with a special interest in IPM.

Climate change is increasingly perceived as one of the major constraints that limit agricultural productivity. Crop losses due to climate change could be direct, such as damages through flooding or storms, or indirect such as altered distribution of crop pests. The real impact of climate change at global level is yet uncertain and likely variable from one region to another. Within this context, it is difficult to predict effects of climate change, particularly when long-term datasets from the past are missing to develop and test predictive models for the future. Nevertheless, our knowledge of plant-disease interactions, population genetics of pathogens as well as crops, and examples of overwhelming establishment of new diseases in a given region provides insights into how climate change may affect disease incidence and severity. Here we report examples of pest populations which have been established across regions previously considered detrimental for their survival and yield losses associated to these pests. Faced with the uncertainty regarding the effects of changing climate on crop protection, here we propose a number of action points that, to our opinion, may help improve current plant protection strategies. Given this uncertainty, policy, research, and extension should be prepared to promote resilience vis-à-vis pests which, at the biophysical level, entails uncovering what currently makes cropping systems resilient, while at the organizational level, the capacity to adapt needs to be recognized and strengthened (Lamichhane et al 2014). Such action points include increase in human resources, development of resilient cropping systems, more focus on crop-weed competition, anticipating of risks and international monitoring, and more effort on breeding for resistance, development of biological control strategies and pest risks analysis. This diversification could be achieved by improving current plant protection practices which might help mitigate the effect of climate change in future crop protection, particularly in the EU, but also at global level. The vision presented here is that of the ENDURE European Research Group, which brings together some of Europe's leading agricultural research, teaching, and extension institutes with a special interest in IPM.

Climate change is increasingly perceived as one of the major constraints that limit agricultural productivity. Crop losses due to climate change could be direct, such as damages through flooding or storms, or indirect such as altered distribution of crop pests. The real impact of climate change at global level is yet uncertain and likely variable from one region to another. Within this context, it is difficult to predict effects of climate change, particularly when long-term datasets from the past are missing to develop and test predictive models for the future. Nevertheless, our knowledge of plant-disease interactions, population genetics of pathogens as well as crops, and examples of overwhelming establishment of new diseases in a given region provides insights into how climate change may affect disease incidence and severity. Here we report examples of pest populations which have been established across regions previously considered detrimental for their survival and yield losses associated to these pests. Faced with the uncertainty regarding the effects of changing climate on crop protection, here we propose a number of action points that, to our opinion, may help improve current plant protection strategies. Given this uncertainty, policy, research, and extension should be prepared to promote resilience vis-à-vis pests which, at the biophysical level, entails uncovering what currently makes cropping systems resilient, while at the organizational level, the capacity to adapt needs to be recognized and strengthened (Lamichhane et al 2014). Such action points include increase in human resources, development of resilient cropping systems, more focus on crop-weed competition, anticipating of risks and international monitoring, and more effort on breeding for resistance, development of biological control strategies and pest risks analysis. This diversification could be achieved by improving current plant protection practices which might help mitigate the effect of climate change in future crop protection, particularly in the EU, but also at global level. The vision presented here is that of the ENDURE European Research Group, which brings together some of Europe's leading agricultural research, teaching, and extension institutes with a special interest in IPM.

Climate change is increasingly perceived as one of the major constraints that limit agricultural productivity. Crop losses due to climate change could be direct, such as damages through flooding or storms, or indirect such as altered distribution of crop pests. The real impact of climate change at global level is yet uncertain and likely variable from one region to another. Within this context, it is difficult to predict effects of climate change, particularly when long-term datasets from the past are missing to develop and test predictive models for the future. Nevertheless, our knowledge of plant-disease interactions, population genetics of pathogens as well as crops, and examples of overwhelming establishment of new diseases in a given region provides insights into how climate change may affect disease incidence and severity. Here we report examples of pest populations which have been established across regions previously considered detrimental for their survival and yield losses associated to these pests. Faced with the uncertainty regarding the effects of changing climate on crop protection, here we propose a number of action points that, to our opinion, may help improve current plant protection strategies. Given this uncertainty, policy, research, and extension should be prepared to promote resilience vis-à-vis pests which, at the biophysical level, entails uncovering what currently makes cropping systems resilient, while at the organizational level, the capacity to adapt needs to be recognized and strengthened (Lamichhane et al 2014). Such action points include increase in human resources, development of resilient cropping systems, more focus on crop-weed competition, anticipating of risks and international monitoring, and more effort on breeding for resistance, development of biological control strategies and pest risks analysis. This diversification could be achieved by improving current plant protection practices which might help mitigate the effect of climate change in future crop protection, particularly in the EU, but also at global level. The vision presented here is that of the ENDURE European Research Group, which brings together some of Europe's leading agricultural research, teaching, and extension institutes with a special interest in IPM.

The use of pesticides made it possible to increase yields, simplify cropping systems, and forego more complicated crop protection strategies. Over-reliance on chemical control, however, is associated with contamination of ecosystems and undesirable health effects. The future of crop production is now also threatened by emergence of pest resistance and declining availability of active substances. There is therefore a need to design cropping systems less dependent on synthetic pesticides. Consequently, the European Union requires the application of eight principles (P) of Integrated Pest Management that fit within sustainable farm management. Here, we propose to farmers, advisors, and researchers a dynamic and flexible approach that accounts for the diversity of farming situations and the complexities of agroecosystems and that can improve the resilience of cropping systems and our capacity to adapt crop protection to local realities. For each principle (P), we suggest that (P1) the design of inherently robust cropping systems using a combination of agronomic levers is key to prevention. (P2) Local availability of monitoring, warning, and forecasting systems is a reality to contendwith. (P3) The decision-making process can integrate cropping system factors to develop longer-term strategies. (P4) The combination of non-chemical methods that may be individually less efficient than pesticides can generate valuable synergies. (P5) Development of new biological agents and products and the use of existing databases offer options for the selection of products minimizing impact on health, the environment, and biological regulation of pests. (P6) Reduced pesticide use can be effectively combined with other tactics. (P7) Addressing the root causes of pesticide resistance is the best way to find sustainable crop protection solutions. And (P8) integration of multi-season effects and trade-offs in evaluation criteria will help developsustainable solutions.

The use of pesticides made it possible to increase yields, simplify cropping systems, and forego more complicated crop protection strategies. Over-reliance on chemical control, however, is associated with contamination of ecosystems and undesirable health effects. The future of crop production is now also threatened by emergence of pest resistance and declining availability of active substances. There is therefore a need to design cropping systems less dependent on synthetic pesticides. Consequently, the European Union requires the application of eight principles (P) of Integrated Pest Management that fit within sustainable farm management. Here, we propose to farmers, advisors, and researchers a dynamic and flexible approach that accounts for the diversity of farming situations and the complexities of agroecosystems and that can improve the resilience of cropping systems and our capacity to adapt crop protection to local realities. For each principle (P), we suggest that (P1) the design of inherently robust cropping systems using a combination of agronomic levers is key to prevention. (P2) Local availability of monitoring, warning, and forecasting systems is a reality to contendwith. (P3) The decision-making process can integrate cropping system factors to develop longer-term strategies. (P4) The combination of non-chemical methods that may be individually less efficient than pesticides can generate valuable synergies. (P5) Development of new biological agents and products and the use of existing databases offer options for the selection of products minimizing impact on health, the environment, and biological regulation of pests. (P6) Reduced pesticide use can be effectively combined with other tactics. (P7) Addressing the root causes of pesticide resistance is the best way to find sustainable crop protection solutions. And (P8) integration of multi-season effects and trade-offs in evaluation criteria will help developsustainable solutions.