IPM was first referred as Integrated Control by Stern et. al. (1959) - as applied pest control which combines and integrates biological and chemical control. Over years IPM has evolved to encompass every factor and activity that influence not only the pests but also all living beings including man, animal, plant etc. and the environment.

Of late, IPM definition given by the FAO International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides is most accepted. It reads as - “IPM is a system that, in the context of the associated environment and the population dynamics of the pest species, utilizes all suitable techniques and methods in as compatible manner as possible and maintains the pest populations at levels below those causing economically unacceptable damage or loss”. 

In reality, IPM is a design and decision making process for structuring ecosystems to minimize pest damage and coping better with unavoidable pest problems. While IPM changes as information, conditions and technologies change, the criteria for judging its effectiveness – productivity, stability, sustainability, and equity – do not. People out their in the fields, with sound knowledge of pests and diseases, crops and cropping systems and the environment are important for the implementation and success of IPM.

Pesticide Industries have played an important role directly or indirectly for the evolution of IPM from the beginning, i.e., from the 1950s when reports on pests developing resistance to pesticides and pesticide residues in food and feeds etc. had started appearing. They offered new chemicals to tackle pest resistance and also worked for addressing the problems of safety to non-targeted organisms and the environment. Industries have contributed much to IPM by their technological innovations and by offering services to educate and train extension workers and farmers.

Industries work with technological innovations as these always help them to meet competition and perform best in the market place. It is this drive which makes them produce the best products possible to satisfy consumers. IPM up-gradation that we have seen over years has come largely because of this. Some important initiatives of industries that have worked for shaping IPM include producing chemicals with new chemistry and formulations, producing bio-products and bio-pesticides and engineering the plant to make it pest resistant, and changing the way the pesticides are applied.

Pesticide industries work on their own and through their associations to serve the customers. In India, three associations namely – the Indian Crop Protection Association (ICPA), Pesticide Association of India (PAI), Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PAFAI) are in operation. All these associations liaise with pesticide regulatory and law enforcing authorities and agencies and work for improving plant protection.

With the national and International thrust and policies, all the associations have embraced working with IPM. For instance, the strategic working objectives ICPA are - Safe and judicious use of pesticides, Integrated Pest Management, Environmental Protection, Intellectual property rights, Common code of conduct for members, and Communications with all stake holders in plant protection.

All the above strategies of the ICPA are implemented through farmers training and education programs, field demonstrations and trials, research and development, seminars, workshops, meetings etc. The results of these activities have been very encouraging. For instance, the results of ICM trials conducted by one of the Industries in cotton are given in Table 1 and Figure 1. 

The outcome of all efforts of industries, governmental and non-governmental institutions have been very positive. The pesticide consumption declined from 80,000 metric tons in 1994-95 to 54,135 MT in 1999-2000. Farmers have realized the importance of IPM and ICM for sustaining and improving crop production.

They have started distinguishing quality chemicals from spurious ones and realize importance of services from industries. Knowledge has increased at all levels. Industries see IPM and ICM as opportunities to try the best of their technologies and efforts to serve farmers, farming communities and people at large, and also to weed out unscrupulous elements among them.. 

Whatever said and done, the concern is for decline in crop productivity and increase in cost of cultivation vis-a-vis degradation of natural resources, contamination of food, feed and environment. Strategic changes in the following are must.

IPM by conception and design takes a narrow view and approach to increasing crop production and productivity by addressing only the pests. It often gets identified with a specific group of professionals – mostly entomologists, pathologists and those involved in plant protection. Often, IPM fails to excite others working on other modes of improving crop production. Even farmers, who do not know or understand IPM fully,

Have apprehensions about IPM as their interest in productivity whether it comes from an improved variety, irrigation and/or plant protection This ideological and conceptual division has seemingly isolated people working in agriculture – with some talking on IPM, some on INM (Integrated Nutrient Management), some on LWM (Land and Water Management) and still others on some new concepts, thus confusing a lot. Thus, a broad and holistic approach of Integrated Crop Management (ICM) is very essential. 

In many workshops and meetings, the references are often made to the amount of pesticide usage in Japan, the USA, Germany etc. as against the usage in India to drive home the point that Indian crop productivity is low because of less usage of pesticides. This sends wrong messages and signals down the line as reference to other factors that largely determine the crop yield are not made intentionally. 

In pesticide trade in India, about 30 % products are known to be fake and counterfeits. These need to be identified and all unscrupulous elements involved in this trade need to be seriously dealt with as they have been playing with the lives of farmers who use pesticides with faith and hope.

A minimum qualification – a degree in agriculture or diploma in plant protection shall be fixed for a person involved/interested in selling pesticides and other agri-inputs. With a requisite qualification, the distributors and dealers are likely to have strong moral and ethical obligations to help and serve farmers. This is very important for the success and spread of IPM and ICM technologies.

A pesticide pollution unit (PPU) is an unit representing average toxicity of the active ingredient (A. I.) unit of a pesticide of the category IV. PPUs for pesticides of different categories I-IV are obtained by multiplying their A. I. units used with factors 1000, 100, 10, and 1 respectively, with a pesticide of category IV representing the least and of category I the highest pollution potential.