evaluation of the integrated pest and vector management ...apps.searo.who.int/pds_docs/b0393.pdf ·...

Evaluation of thE intEgratEd PEst and vEctor ManagEMEnt (iPvM)

ProjEct in sri lanka

Mission rEPort

Submitted by:

H van den BergP K Das

A von Hildebrand V Ragunathan

List of acronyms v

Executive summary vi Rationaleandmissionobjectives vi

Missionmembers viii

1. Background 1 1.1 IPMinAsia 1

1.2 IPMinSriLanka 2

1.3 WHO’sstrategyonIVM 3

2. IPVM in Sri Lanka 4 2.1 TheIPVMconcept 4

2.2 Historyoftheproject 5

2.3 Institutionalsetting 6

2.4 Results 7

3. IPVM – Strengths and challenges 9 3.1Generalfindings 9

3.2ConvergencebetweenAgricultureandHealth 9

3.3 VectormanagementthroughtheFFSapproach 11

3.4 CurriculumonIPVM 12

3.5 FarmeractionsaftertheIPVM-FFS 13

3.6 Evaluatingprojectimplementationandimpact 14

3.7 Expansionandreplication 17

3.8 Nextsteps 17

4. Conclusions 19

5. Recommendations 20

Contents

Annexes Annex1. Photoreportoffieldvisits 21

Annex2. Field-levelachievementsoftheprojecttodate 26

Annex3. Overviewofconvergence 28

Annex4. Agriculturaloperationsinrice 30

Annex5. CurriculumonIPMversusIPVM 32

Annex6. PresentandpotentialstakeholdersinIPVM 36

Annex7. Proposedindicatorsformonitoringfieldactivities 37

Annex8. Proposedframeworkforimpactassessment 39

Annex9. Literatureconsulted 42

Annex10. Missionprogram 44

Annex11. Contactdetailsandpersonsmet 45

AESA Agro-ecosystemAnalysis

AMC Anti-MalariaCampaign

BPH BrownPlanthopper

DAS DaysafterSowing

DOA DepartmentofAgriculture

DOPH DepartmentofPublicHealth

EOH Environmental&OccupationalHealth

FA FieldAssistant

FAO FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations

FBO Farmer-basedOrganization

FFS FarmerFieldSchool

IPM IntegratedPestManagement

IPVM IntegratedPestandVectorManagement

ITN Insecticide-treatedbedNet

IVM IntegratedVectorManagement

IWMI InternationalWaterManagementInstitute

MASL MahaweliAuthorityofSriLanka

MOH MinistryofHealth

NGO Non-governmentalorganization

PHI PublicHealthInspector

POP PersistentOrganicPollutant

RMO RegionalMalariaOfficer

SEARO SouthEastAsiaRegionalOffice

T&V TrainingandVisitsystem

UNDP UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme

UNEP UnitedNationsEnvironmentProgramme

UNICEF UnitedNationsChildren’sFund

WHA WorldHealthAssembly

WHO WorldHealthOrganization

Annexes Annex1. Photoreportoffieldvisits 21

Annex2. Field-levelachievementsoftheprojecttodate 26

Annex3. Overviewofconvergence 28

Annex4. Agriculturaloperationsinrice 30

Annex5. CurriculumonIPMversusIPVM 32

Annex6. PresentandpotentialstakeholdersinIPVM 36

Annex7. Proposedindicatorsformonitoringfieldactivities 37

Annex8. Proposedframeworkforimpactassessment 39

Annex9. Literatureconsulted 42

Annex10. Missionprogram 44

Annex11. Contactdetailsandpersonsmet 45

�Listofacronyms

List of Acronyms

BACKGROUNDIntegrated Pest and Vector Management(IPVM) builds upon the successful experienceinIntegratedPestManagement(IPM),whichisbased on the practical, field-based educationof groups of rice farmers in weekly sessionsof the Farmer Field Schools (FFS). Farmerslearn the skills of observation-based cropmanagementtogrowbettercropsinhealthierenvironments and reduce dependence onthe use of insecticides. The wetland riceenvironment,whileprovidingfoodandfodder,also supports breeding of the vectors ofhumandiseases.TheIPVMprojectinSriLanka,whichstarted in2002withsupport fromFAOand UNEP, has been unique in connectingvector management with agriculturalactivities thereby actively involving farmingcommunities in observation-based decision-makingonvectormanagement.Anevaluationmission was organized by WHO’s South-EastAsia Regional Office on the effectiveness,sustainability and replicability of the projecttoassist intheimplementationofWHO’snewstrategy on Integrated Vector Management(IVM).

RATIONALE AND MISSION OBJECTIVESMalaria and other vector-borne diseases likelymphatic filariasis, leishmaniasis, Japaneseencephalitis and dengue are a major healthproblem in the South East Asia Region (WHO,2004a). Moreover, the 2004 tsunami has

increased several risk factors for a number ofvector-borne diseases in coastal areas due tonew vector breeding opportunities, worsenedsanitary and housing conditions, breakdownofhealthservices,movementsofnon-immunepeopleandweakenednutritionalstatusofthedisplacedpopulation.Inthewakeofincreaseddrug resistance and insecticide resistance inthe vectors, there is a need for establishingintegrated vector management strategieswhich are less reliant on chemical methods ofdisease control, and involve other sectors andlocal communities in ecosystem managementtoreducehealthrisks.

The Integrated Pest and Vector Management(IPVM)projectinSriLankahasforthefirsttimeintegrated vector management with farmereducation in agriculture, thus involving ruralcommunities in reducing the health risks ofvector-bornedisease.Thenewapproachcouldpotentially benefit other areas in the region,including those affected by the tsunami.Prior to preparation for a workshop related tointegratedvectormanagementandintegratedpestmanagementintheSouthEastAsiaregion,in October 2006, an assessment is needed oftheuniqueIPVMprojectinSriLanka.

Hence,themainobjectivesofthemissionwere:1. Todeterminetheeffectiveness,

sustainabilityandreplicabilityoftheIPVMapproachinSriLanka

2. ToexploreprospectsforreplicationinthecountryitselfandinIndia

EXEcUtiVE sUmmAry

MissionReportEvaluationoftheIntegratedPestandVectorManagement(IPVM)projectinSriLanka

vi

GENERAL FINDINGS The mission team observed that the projectis basically on the right track. Visits to IPVMFarmer Field School activities (see locations inFigure1)anddiscussionswithIPVM-FFSalumnidemonstrated that farmers can identify andmonitor larval and adult populations of themajor mosquito genera. Farmers are able toanalyze their agricultural and peri-domesticenvironmentsandmakesounddecisionsonthemanagementofnotonlyvectorsinasustainedmanner, but also pests and crops. IPVM-FFSalumni reported a sharp drop in insecticideuse attributable to the training. Vectormanagement activities are being practicedafter FFS training, including small-scale localrearing of fish, clearing of coconut shells andcontainers,coveringwatercontainersatregulartimeintervals,andgroupactiononhouseholdandvillagesanitationandpreventivemeasuressuch as bed net use. Initial research findingsgeneratedduringtheprojectsuggest that therole of farmers in vector management is mostcrucialintheshort,rainyseasonwhenclusteredecosystem management was associated withloweranophelinemosquitodensities,whichcanpotentially break the transmission cycle. Thiseffectwasnotobservedinthelongrainyseason.The role of agricultural use of insecticides onmosquito dynamics needs further study. IPVMleadtoincreaseduseofmosquitobednets.Theteamdevelopedframeworksformonitoringofprojectperformanceandevaluationofprojectimpacts. Recurrent costs of the IPVM-FFS areapproximately$10pergraduatedfarmer.

CURRICULUM ThereductionofhealthrisksinirrigatedagriculturecanbemademoreexplicitintheFFScurriculum.Health risks are not limited to vector-bornedisease but include harmful effects of pesticide

use in agriculture on occupational poisoningand food safety. The mission recommendedinclusionofexercisesonself-monitoringofsignsand symptoms of acute pesticide poisoninginto the IPVM-FFS curriculum. The mission alsorecommendedbroadeningoftheFFSactivitiestoincludefieldwalksforothercropsgrownbyricefarmers using pesticides, to address pesticide-related health risks in a more comprehensiveway.

CONVERGENCEThe mission found that convergence betweenactivities by the health and agriculture sectorshavecomealongway,producingeffectivecross-sectorlearningandajointprocessofcurriculumdevelopment.However,thereisaneedtofurtherenhanceconvergence.Inparticular,therolesandactivitiesofthetwosectorscouldbecomebetterintegrated.Thiscanbeachievedbydistrict-levelworkshopsforalllocalstakeholdersandbybettersynchronizationofmosquitosurveysbytheAnti-Malaria Campaign (AMC) with weekly IPVM-FFSactivities to allow for interaction with farmersresultinginmutualbenefits.

VECTOR CONTROLTheAMChassofarbeenplayingasupplementaryrolebysupportingapredominantlyagriculture-driven project. The main challenge for AMC isto internalize IPVM into its own vector-bornediseasecontrolstrategy.Infact,AMChasstartedto adopt IPVM as prevention strategy in lowtransmission areas, and there is prospect toextentthisstrategytointermediatetransmissionareas because of the demonstrated synergisticeffectbetweenIPVMandbednetuse.Moreover,the current surveillance system of the AMC,aimingtodetectearlywarningsignalsofdiseaseoutbreaks to initiate action, is constrainedby limited human and financial resources.

�iiExecutivesummary


viii

Surveillance could benefit from involvingcommunitiesanddevelopinglocalcapabilityonmonitoring and evaluation as part of an IPVMstrategy.Thiswouldprovidebettercoverageandintervalsofdatacollection,allowingtheAMCtotargettheirinterventions(FFSorbednet)moreaccurately and more timely. Community-basedsurveillance would also enhance local projectownershipandpreventiveactionstakenbylocalpeople.

NEXT STEPSThere was a strong overall consensus amongthe directors of AMC and Environmental &Occupational Health (EOH), Ministry of Healthof Sri Lanka, WHO and FAO about the value ofIPVMwhichinvolveslocalpeopleinreducingandevaluating health risks related to vector-bornediseases and chemical pesticides. However, thesensitization of policy makers, particularly inthe health sector, is a priority. WHO-SEARO willsupport the production of a short video film topublicizeIPVM.TheDirectorEOH,whojoinedthemissionteam’sfieldvisits,will introduceIPVMata national session of the Health DevelopmentCommittee Meeting to announce a seminar onIPVM. WHO-Sri Lanka agreed to organize andsponsor the seminar, which will bring togethermajorplayersfromtheHealthMinistryandotherpartnerstodiscussthevalueofIPVMandidentifycommon objectives and possible synergisticeffects. In parallel, the mission findings and thevideo will serve as inputs to the regional IVMworkshop, planned for October 2006, probablyinPondicherry,India,todiscusstheprospectsofreplicationofIPVMinothercountriesandaspartof the health emergency response in and afternaturaldisasters.

MISSION MEMBERSThe mission members included experts inintegratedvectormanagementand/orintegratedpest management with extensive experience intheSouthAsianregion.

International experts:1. DrHenkvandenBerg,Consultant

onIntegratedPestManagementandIntegratedVectorManagement,Wageningen,theNetherlands

2. DrP.K.Das,Director,VectorControlResearchCentre,Pondicherry,India

3. MrAlexandervonHildebrand,RegionalAdvisoronEnvironmentalHealth.WHOSouth-EastAsiaRegionalOffice,NewDelhi,India

4. DrV.Ragunathan,PlantProtectionAdvisortotheGovernmentofIndia,andIPMConsultantforFAO

National Experts:1. MrNalinMunasinghe,Programme

Associate,FAORepresentative’sOffice.202,BauddhalokaMawatha,Colombo-07,SriLanka

2. MrK.Piyasena,DeputyDirectorPlantProtection,PlantProtectionandSeedCertification,DepartmentofAgriculture,Peradeniya,SriLanka

3. MrHectorSenerath,NationalConsultant,IPVMProject.FAO,51/2,Thotagamuwa,Palapathwela,Matale,SriLanka

4. DrC.K.Shanmugarajah,Director.EnvironmentalOccupationalHealthandFoodSafety,MinistryofHealthandNutrition,Colombo,SriLanka

�Background

1.1 IPM in AsiaTraditional agriculture in tropical Asia waspracticedinharmonywithnature.Itpreservedthediverse life forms with the agro-ecosystems andpromotedtheconservationofbio-diversitywithinfarmingsystems.However,withtheintroductionof chemical insecticides, plant protectionspecialists in the early 1950s recommendedcomplete control of pests with chemicalinsecticides,ignoringthebeneficialroleoffauna.Subsequently, during the period of the GreenRevolutionfarmersindevelopingeconomieswereurgedtouseinsecticidesona“calendarbasis”orbasedoneconomicthresholdlevelsofpests.Thecosts were considered an acceptable insurance“premium”.However,farmerswereunabletodealwiththecomplexitiesofpestdevelopmentunderhighinputregime.Somegovernmentscontractedpesticidecompaniestoprovidelarge-scaleaerialapplicationsofinsecticideswithdisregardtothenegative impacts. Crop protection specialistsand government-supported extension servicesassumed that they were better able to takedecisions to control pests, than the farmers.However, their perceptions got jolted due tomassiveoutbreaksofpestslikebrownplanthopper(BPH) in many rice-growing countries in South-EastAsia.ResearcherssoondiscoveredthatBPHoutbreakswereinsecticide-induced(Kenmoreetal.,1984)andthatbreedingricevarietiesresistantto BPH under continued pressure of insecticideusewouldbeafutileexercise(Gallagher,1984).

Despitethesefacts,manygovernmentscontinuedto promote large-scale use of pesticides under

BackgroundBAckgroUnd

their sponsored plant protection programmesas well as by extending subsidy on pesticides,under the falsenotionofprotectingthecroptoensurefoodgrainproductiontoprovidefoodtoa growing population. Such a biased approachby government agencies supported by plantprotectionspecialistshasledtothedevelopmentof resistance among pests, pest resurgence andsecondary pests emerging as major problems,environmental pollution, pesticide residue infood and food commodities and increasinghealth hazards to farmers and consumers (PeterOoi,1998;Ragunathan,2002).

Inresponsetotheemergenceofsuchproblemsassociated with chemical pesticides whichwere used for the control of insect pests bygovernments, extension services and farmers,the search for solutions to these problems ledtothedevelopmentofanewformofIntegratedPest Management (IPM) through a farmereducationalapproach.TheworkingdefinitionoftheparticipatoryformofIPMiscomposedoffourprinciples,whichare:

1. Growahealthycrop2. Conservenaturalenemies3. Conductregularfieldobservations4. Farmersbecomeexperts

The first principle refers to good agriculturalpractices necessary for growing a crop that isable to withstand environmental stresses suchas infestation by plant feeding insects or plantdiseases.The second principle refers to the aimof reducing the use of chemical insecticides to


2

deliberatelysupportthepopulationsofbeneficialorganisms.Thethirdprinciplereferstotheneedfor farmers to regularly observe and analysetheir crop ecosystem in order to make timelyandevidence-basedmanagementdecisions.Thefourthprinciple implies thatexpertiseonsoundcrop management has to be with the farmersthemselves, who are in the best position torespondtolocalanddynamicfieldsituations.

IPM programs in rice have relied on the FarmerFieldSchool(FFS)approachtoempowerfarmerstogrowhealthycropsinacost-effectivemanner,while chemical pesticides are used only as lastresort. The IPM-FFS is a modern form of farmereducation which is field-oriented, practicaland which used experiential learning methods(‘learningbydoing’).IPM-FFSactivities,oftenheldundera treenear thefield, takeplace in regularsessions, starting from planting and continuinguntil harvest. Groups of 15–30 farmers observeand analyze their agro-ecosystem on a weeklybasis, facilitated by a field trainer.They learn tomake appropriate management decisions, theeffect of which is evaluated in the next weeklyobservation.

These weekly learning cycles give farmers theconfidenceandcapacitytogrowahealthycrop.This learning process is assisted by additionalexercises and simple experiments that enablefarmers to understand aspects of field ecologyandplantdevelopment(e.g.pests-naturalenemypopulation dynamics and crop damage-yieldrelationships). Farmers can thus discover thatinsecticides are rarely needed in tropical riceecosystems.Infact,insecticidescaneasilyinduceapestoutbreakproblem,forexampleinthecaseofthebrownplanthopper.GroupcommunicationexercisesincorporatedintotheFFScurriculumaimtoenhancegroupbuildingbetweenparticipants,whichcanfacilitatetheemergenceofconcertedaction after the FFS. IPM Farmer Field Schools

in tropical rice commonly result in immediatebenefits to farmers in terms of reduced agro-chemical inputs and stable or increased yields.Moreover, rice FFS are a proven entry point forfurther farmer-driven development and localprograms.

IPMprogramsinAsiahaveaddedpost-FFStrainingactivitiesinordertostrengthenthreetypesofskills:(i) skills to conduct farmer-to-farmer educationthrough field schools, (ii) organizing skills toconduct planning, management and evaluationof concerted activities and associations, and (iii)skillsofexperimentationtogenerateandusenewknowledgetofeedintolocalprograms.Together,these three elements facilitated sustainedcommunity-basedactivities,suchasfarmerclubs,associations, farmer advocacy, and lead towardsfarmer empowerment and local programmeownership.

This has resulted in what has been called“Community IPM”, a situation where farmers areorganising and implementing their own IPMactivities, as instigators rather than recipientsof IPM.Hence,Community IPM is about farmersjoining forces to promote farming practiceswhichtheyknowarehealthierandmoreefficient(Pontius, Bartlett & Dilts, 2002). GovernmentandNGOtrainersthushaveanewroletoplayinsupportingfarmerswhoaremanagingtheirownIPMactivities.CommunityIPMhasemergedfromtraining programmes organised by GovernmentagenciesandNGOsinvariouspartsofAsia.

1.2 IPM in Sri LankaAs early as 1984, rice IPM was initiated underthe transfer of technology model in the formof the Training & Visit (T&V) extension system.In this top-down, message-based system,technology was transferred to farmers byContact Farmers. Despite strong policy support,

�Background

the effect was limited. The model worked forsimple prescriptions, for instance, on the use ofimprovedvarieties,butdidnotworkforcomplexfieldproblems,forinstance,inpestmanagement.Subsequently, the Contact Farmer concept wasreplaced with a Group concept called the BlockDemonstration. Educational principles on IPMdeveloped in the Philippines were incorporatedinthecurriculumin1985,andinitialresultswerepositive. Thereafter, the programme was scaledupveryfastwith35,000farmerstrainedby1987,but the content and quality of training hadbeen compromised. A parallel development inIndonesiaandthePhilippinessincethelate1980sgave rise to the IPM-FFS approach (see section1.1).The programme on participatory IPM in SriLanka started from 1995, albeit at a small scaledue to a consistent lack of funding throughoutthe1990swithjustthirtyunitsperseason.From1999 onwards more funds became available,and larger numbers of trainers graduated fromseason-long training-of-trainers. By 2002 whentheIPMprojectended,therewere220IPMmastertrainers,halfofwhominirrigationsystemsoftheMahaweliAuthorityofSriLanka(MASL),andover200 farmer trainers (farmers who have becomeFFStrainers),capableoffacilitatingFFSinalargenumberoflocations(seevandenBerg,Senerath

& Amarasinghe, 2002). Human resources in theNorthernandEasternprovinceshavebeensmallduetothehistoryoftheongoingconflict.

1.3 WHO’s strategy on IVMIn 2004, a Global Strategic Framework onIntegrated Vector Management (IVM) wasdeveloped and is now the official strategy forWHO (WHO, 2004b). IVM involves the use of arangeof locallyappropriateandeffectivevectorcontrol interventions, often in combination,to reduce or interrupt disease transmission.Interventionoptionsareselectedonthebasisofknowledgeaboutlocalvectorbiology,ecosystem,disease transmission, and morbidity. Chemicalinsecticides are considered the last resort forvector control after all non-chemical optionshave been considered. IVM is based on thepremise that effective planning and operationsfor vector management is not the sole preserveofthehealthsectorbutrequiresthecollaborationofvariouspublicandprivateagencies.Theactiveengagementof localcommunities isconsideredakeyfactorinassuringsustainability.TheaimofIVM is to improve cost-effectiveness, ecologicalsoundness and sustainability of vector-bornediseasecontrol.

iPVm in sri LAnkA

2.1 The IPVM conceptThe rice field, while providing food and fodder,supports pest and vector mosquito breeding.Vector borne diseases occur where there is aclose interaction between host parasite andvector.Agriculturalenvironments,irrigatedcropsin particular, and rural residential areas provideconditions well suited for breeding of vectorsof several human diseases, such as malaria,Japanese encephalitis, lymphatic filariasis anddengue.Therefore, reducing vector proliferationand interaction by changing farming practiceswillreducethediseaserisk.

Moreover,plantprotectionmeasuresoftenleadtoanincreaseinpesticideuse,whichcanresultin mosquito resurgence and cause resistancein vector populations against the insecticidesused in current vector control interventions.Therefore,thereisaneedtoconvergetheIPMand IVM strategies in such a way that farmerspracticing IPM not only improve their crop

productivity by adopting environmentallysound practices, but also minimize the healthrisks associated with farming practices andcommunitybehaviour.

Healthrisksassociatedwithriceagro-ecosystemsthus include exposure to hazardous chemicalpesticides, depletion of beneficial fauna withthe potential for resurging populations of pestsand vectors of public health importance, andprecipitating resistance in the vectors (Box1). Farmers should play a key role in reducingthesehealthrisks,andatthesametimeimprovesustainable productivity of their agriculturalenvironment. There is need to educate farmersthroughtheFFSonreducingtheirenvironmentalhealth risks using the experiential learningapproach of the FFS.This requires collaborationbetween the sectors of health, agriculture andirrigation to make the most efficient use oflimited resources to reach common objectives.IPMFarmerFieldSchoolsprovidetheopportunity

Irrigatedagriculturalenvironmentsprovideabreedinghabitatforvectorsofmalaria,lymphaticfilariasis,Japaneseencephalitis,dengue,etc.UseofinsecticidesinagriculturecancauseresistanceinDisease-transmittingvectorsbreedinginagriculturalenvironments,therebyreducingtheeffectivenessofinsecticide-basedvectorcontrolmethodsSprayingofinsecticidescausesoccupationalpoisoningbesidespoisoningatthehouseholdlevelSprayingmayleavetoxicresiduesinfood,thusadverselyaffectingconsumers’healthDestructionofbeneficialfaunabybroad-spectruminsecticidescancauseresurgenceofdisease-transmit-tingvectorsDomesticanimalsandlivestockcanserveasalternateormainhostsofdiseasesaffectinghumansThelevelofincomeandfoodproducedthroughagricultureinfluencethewell-beingandresilienceoffarmingcommunities

1.

2.3.

4.5.6.

7.8.

Health risks associated with agricultureBox1


4

for inter-sectoral collaboration and institutionallearningthroughafield-basedapproach.

2.2 History of the projectThe IPVM project originates from the requestby the Stockholm Convention on POPs, theBahia Declaration of the IntergovernmentalForum for Chemical Safety and World HealthAssembly resolution WHA 50.13, to developviable alternative strategies for the control ofvector-borne diseases, malaria in particular, andto reduce the reliance on insecticides throughpromotion of integrated pest-managementapproaches.Aninternationalworkshopfacilitatedby UNEP provided the entry point for inter-sectoralcollaborationinprojectdevelopment inSriLanka,buildingontheexperienceoftheIPMprojectinSriLanka.TheFAOSriLankanofficehasbeen instrumental in facilitating the process ofplanning with the sectors of Agriculture, Health(AntiMalariaCampaign)andMahaweliAuthority.

Theprojectwasdevelopedasapilotwithlimitedfunding.FAOprovidedagrantofUS$35,000forinitiation of the project and for field activities,which were the only source of external fundinguntil May 2005.The project began on 14 March2002 with an inception workshop in Colombo,attendedbyallmajorstakeholders representingthe Department of Agriculture, the Anti-Malaria Campaign (AMC), Mahaweli Authority,InternationalWaterManagementInstitute(IWMI),UNDP and FAO.WHO was invited but could notparticipate at that time. Workshop objectivesweretoarriveataconsensusonprojectlocations,courseofactioninthefirstyear,andtherolesofdifferentinstitutionalparticipants.

April2002,a4-dayfield-basedworkshopwasheldinAnuradhapuratoeducateIPMtrainersfromtheselected project locations on mosquito biology,mosquitoidentification,breedinghabitats,adult

mosquito sampling, and vector managementoptions. Staff from AMC and IWMI providedtechnical inputs on the vector component. Theprocessofcurriculumdevelopmentwasstarted.The participants developed a questionnaire tolearn about farmers’ knowledge about vector-bornediseases.Theresultsoftheirsurveyservedincurriculumdevelopment.Practicalplansweremade to initiate work on sampling, testing ofmethods/exercises,andmapping,andtoconductlocalbaselinesurveys.Sixinitialprojectlocationswere Mahaweli system H, Puttalam, Udawalawe,Monaragala,VavuniyaandTrincomalee(Figure1;alsorefertoTable2).Inafollow-onworkshoponemonthlater,theinitialfieldworkandcurriculumwere evaluated and improved. Provisionalcurricula were then field-tested in ongoingIPM-FFS. Moreover, a plan was made by AMCteams in the districts, to monitor the impact ofthe interventions on mosquito larval and adultdensity.

IPVM Farmer Field School activities wereimplemented during the long rainy (Maha)

�IPVMinSriLanka

Figure 1: Map of Sri Lanka with IPVM locations indicated in thelegend (district or Mahaweli system, and name of village; refer toAnnex2).Dashedlinesindicatedistrictborders;solidlinesindicatebordersofMahaweliAuthorityirrigationsystems.

1: Mahaweli H, Talawa2: Udawalawe, Kiriibbanwewa3: Monaragala, Buttala4: Matale, Lenadora5: Mahaweli C, Weheragala6: Mahaweli G, Diyabeduma7: Matara, Various Villages8: Hambantota, Meegahajandura9: Puttalam, Nawagattegama10: Vavuniya11: Trincomalee

and short rainy (Yala) seasons (subject to theavailabilityofwater)intheprojectlocations,byclusteringthe interventionstoachievegradualcoverageofmostfarmfamiliesinacontiguousarea. At most locations, a comparison villagewas selected, situated 2–3 km away from theintervention village in order to evaluate theeffectsofintervention.Centrallevelworkshopswere held at the beginning of every followingseason,withparticipationbytheIPVMtrainers,agricultural officers and AMC staff, to evaluatepreviousactivities,planforthenewseason,andto add technical content. Provision was madeto allow trainers and farmers to address theirresearch questions by doing mostly replicatedfield experiments related to the interactionbetween agricultural practices and vectorbreeding. From 2002–04, a doctoral researchproject was attached to the IPVM project tostudy the impact of the clustered IPVM-FFSinterventions on mosquito populations andon farmer knowledge and farmer actions. Theresearch findings have been published (seeYasuokaetal.,2006a,2006b).

In January 2004, a stakeholder seminar wasorganized in Colombo to encourage increasedproject ownership of different partners and toinitiateanallianceforfurtherprojectdevelopment.Project partners from both the Agriculture andHealth sector indicated the benefits of linkingthetwosectorsinirrigatedagriculture.TherewasinterestamongtheMOHinusingtheFarmerFieldSchoolforbroaderhealthissues.However,therewas some concern over the weak link betweenAMCandPublicHealthstaffinthedistricts.

In June 2005, a two-day workshop was held inKandytodiscussthestrategyforthenewPhaseII of the project funded by UNEP ChemicalsDivision,withabudgetofUS$56,500,insupportofcontinuationofthefieldactivitiesoveraperiodof two more years (2005-07). Objectives of the

new phase were to (i) develop and implementparticipatory training for rural communitieswhich would address both rice cultivation andvector management; and (ii) facilitate farmer-operated community programmes whichaddressagriculturalproblemsandhumanvector-borne diseases. A part-time national expert wasrecruited to assist the national counterparts incoordinatingthefieldproject.Alsoin2005,severalshortcourseswereheldtotrainmoreIPMtrainerson the IPVM curriculum. The training of IPVM-FFS alumni farmers to become farmer trainerswas considered important to achieve sufficientcoverageandscaleoftheinterventionlocations.ThetimelineoftheIPVMprojectarepresentedinTable1.

2.3 Institutional settingThe Plant Protection Service of the DOA at thecentralgovernmentlevelinPeradeniyahasbeenFAO’s main counterpart in the preceding IPMprojectandlikewiseinthepresentIPVMproject,withtheDeputyDirectorPlantProtectionasthemaincoordinatoroftheprojecttoliaisewiththeotherinstitutionalassociates.DOA’sroleincludesmonitoring and evaluation through field visits,organizing planning meetings with the otherpartners and organizing and implementingtechnical workshops. The Farmer Field Schoolapproach conflicts, to some extent, with thedepartment’s homemade‘block demonstrations’approach for rice intensification, which comesundertheseparateExtensiondivision.However,itisincreasinglyrecognizedthatthetwoapproachesarecomplementary.

TimelineoftheIPVMprojectinSriLankaTable12002 StartofIPVM,withFAOfunding(“PhaseI”)

2005 ContinuationofIPVM,withUNEPfunding(“PhaseII”)

2006 EvaluationMissionbyWHO(SEARO)

2007 Projectedendofpresentproject


6

TheprovincialDOAs,beingindependententities,are responsible for project implementationwithin theirboundaries,and receive technicalsupport fromthecentral levelDOA.MahaweliAuthority, which is a separate ministry,governs the larger part of the main irrigationschemes of the country. Mahaweli Authorityhas been a committed partner in the earlierIPM project and in the present IPVM project,and is continuing to implement‘conventional’IPMFarmerFieldSchoolswithitsown,thoughlimited, funding. The Anti-malaria Campaignunder the central government department ofPublic Health has so far been involved in theIPVM project by providing advisory functionsandbyconductingimpactstudiesonmosquitopopulations.

2.4 Results To date the project has completed 67 FarmerField Schools on IPVM benefiting some 1000individualfarmersandtheirfamiliesinatotalof11villages in11districtsorMahaweli systems.The field school participants were commonlyneighbouring farmers from one irrigationtract.Women’sparticipationhasbeen20–30%,

whichappearstobeonthelowside,inviewofthe substantial role of women in rice farmingand family health. In each district or system,FFS activities were clustered to graduallycoverall farmer families inavillage.Clusteringwas considered necessary for the purpose ofachieving area-wide effects on adult mosquitovector populations. Table 2 shows that twolocations, Trincomalee and Vavuniya, weredroppedearlieron,whichwasduetothelackofhumanresourcesandexperienceonIPMbecauseoftheconflictsituation.Puttalamwasdroppedafter several consecutive seasons of drought,despitestrongbackingbylocalIPMtrainers.Thelocation at Mahaweli H was completed by thelong rainy season 2004/05, and was droppedthereafter due to transfer of field staff. In thelongrainyseason2004/05,MahaweliAuthorityand Southern Province organized upgradingTraining-of-TrainercoursesfortheirIPMtrainers,withresourcepersonsfromtheAMCandDOA.Followingthistraining,newIPVMfieldactivitieswerestartedinMahaweliC,MahaweliG,Mataraand Hambantota (Table 2; also refer to Figure1).Farmer-to-farmertrainingwillbeinitiatedin2006.TheYala2005seasonwasskippedduetodrought(Annex2A).

Projectlocations,withtheirstartingdataanddatetheywerediscontinued.Table2 District or system Village Started Discontinued

1 MahaweliH Talawa 2002 2005

2 Udawalawe Kiriibbanwewa 2002 -

3 Monaragala Buttala 2002 -

4 Matale Lenadora 2005 -

5 MahaweliC Weheragala 2005 -

6 MahaweliG Diyabeduma 2005 -

7 Matara Variousvillages 2004 -

8 Hambantota Meegahajandura 2004 -

9 Puttalam Nawagattegama 2002 2004

10 Vavuniya Unknown 2002 2003

11 Trincomalee Unknown 2002 2003

�IPVMinSriLanka

AMC’s activities by the RMO and their entomo-logicalteamsof6personsconductedfortnightlysurveys in Mahaweli H and Udawalawe in theintervention village and the comparison villageat2–3kmdistance.Samplingmethodsforadultmosquitoes and other aquatic insects were onecattle-baitednettrap(tosimulateoutdoorbiting),one cattle-baited hut trap (to simulate in-doorbiting) in each village, and larval populationsweresampledwithdipperstakenfromricefields,tank beds, seepage pools and peri-domesticenvironments.Adultandlarvalmosquitoeswereidentifiedbytheentomologicalteamstospecieslevel. AMC limited their activities to only few ofthefieldlocations,duetoconstraintsoffinancialand human resources. Initially, the Mahaweli Hand Udawalawe locations were covered, but intheformer,AMCactivitiesalsostoppedafterthelocationwasdropped.Instead,anewlocationwasinitiatedinMatalein2005withFFSinterventionsandentomologicalsurveysbytheAMC(Annex2B).AMC’s regular activities by the Regional MalariaOfficers(RMO)andtheirentomologicalteamsareroutineentomologicalsurveys,communityhealthactivities and coordination of spray operations.AMC’sfutureroleinIPVMisdiscussedinsection3.2and3.3.

Trainers and farmers conducted a number offield experiments, 46 in total, to address theirown research questions related mostly to theeffects agricultural practices (planting method,herbicides, insecticides, chemical fertilizers,

organic fertilizer) on populations of mosquitovectors and other aquatic insects in rice fields(Annex2C).Thereisneedtocollectandevaluatetheresultsofalltheseexperiments.Since2005,participatory planning exercises have beenfacilitated by the project for FFS alumni in 6locations to allow for further farmer-drivenaction in accordance with local problems andopportunities.

Costsofa20-weekFarmerFieldSchoolonIPVMare US$ 170 per unit for 15-25 participants, orabout$10perfarmer.Costitemsaretheallowanceforthetrainer,afieldday,trainingmaterialsandfarmerrefreshments.

As the present project is still considered a pilotactivity,theachievementsintermsofnumbersoffieldactivitieshavebeenmodest.However,basedontheexperienceacquiredfromtheprecedingIPMproject,thereisscopeforexpandingtheprojectto a larger number of locations. For example, in2001theIPMprojectconducted160IPMFarmerFieldSchoolsinoneyear.Furthermore,theprojecthas recently started to facilitate participatoryplanningexercisesandfieldstudiesforIPVM-FFSalumni to assist the community in deciding ontheir future course of action related to broaderlocalproblemsconcerningthegeneralwell-beingofthecommunity.Theseactivitiesareexpectedtofacilitate farmer-operated community programswhichaddressagriculturalproblemsandhumanvector-bornediseases.


8

iPVm – strEngtHs And cHALLEngEs

3.1 General findingsField visits by the mission team to IPVM FarmerFieldSchoolactivitiesanddiscussionswithIPVM-FFSalumniindicatedthatfarmershavedevelopedtheir skills to analyze their agro-ecosystemsand are able to identify and monitor larval andadultpopulationsofthemajormosquitogenera(Anopheles, Culex, Aedes),andtoclearlydistinguishbetween beneficial and harmful insects. Theseskills allow them to make ecologically sounddecisions on the management of vectors, pestsandcrops(refertoAnnex1).IPVM-FFSgraduateshave cut down considerably on insecticide usein rice, were aware of the negative impacts ofpesticide usage on the agro-ecosystem, andcommonlystartedto incorporatericestraw intothesoiltoimprovesoiltextureandorganicmattercontent.

Various vector control methods involvingenvironmental and biological control methodswere adopted by the IPVM-FFS alumni,contributing to reducing risks of vector-bornedisease at the community level. IPVM helpedfarmers to minimize insecticide inputs, improveproductivity, and reduce the health risksassociated with their ecosystem managementpractices. IPVM Farmer Field Schools generateda visible enthusiasm and self-confidence in thefarming community. At one site visited, IPVMalumnireportedthattheyproactivelyapproachedthe anti-malaria staff operating in their area tolearn about vector-borne disease issues. Follow-up activities after the IPVM-FFS have recentlybeenstartedintheprojectlocationsbutneedto

be given dueattention in the remainingyearoftheproject.

Theprojectisrelevanttoanumberofsectors,andis expected to have various health benefits (seeBox2).

Annex6indicatesthestakeholdersoftheprojectthathavealreadybeenexposedtoIPVM,mostlyfrom the Department of Agriculture, MahaweliAuthority and the Anti Malaria Campaign, butvariousotherpotentialstakeholdersstillneedtobesensitizedaboutIPVM,includingpolicymakersand directors in sectors of health, agriculture,environment and education. Moreover, atthe district level, there are several potentialactors in the sectors of health, education andenvironment which need to be exposed to theproject.Forexample,IPVMisapotentialtopicforproject-based education in secondary schools.In fact, in the previous IPM project, field-basedmethodology on IPM has been successfullyincorporatedinthecurriculaofselectedprimaryand secondary schools, mostly in the CentralProvince. IPMor IPVMeducation inschools isofparticular significance as children are the mostvulnerabletopesticideexposure.

3.2 Convergence between Agriculture and Health

A chronological overview of the activitiesby the agriculture and health sectors, andwhen convergence took place between theiractivities,isprovidedinAnnex3.Duringthepast

�IPVM–Strengthsandchallenges

decade, IPM Farmer Field Schools have beenimplemented by the agricultural sector withoutdirectlinkageswiththehealthsector.Inparallel,theAntiMalariaCampaignhasbeenconductingits own health-related activities. Its regularactivitiesbytheRegionalMalariaOfficers (RMO)and their entomological teams are: (i) routineentomological surveys for the main vectorbornedisease,(ii)communityhealthactivitiestodistributebednetsandincreaseawarenessaboutpersonalprotection,and(iii)coordinationofsprayoperations;thelatteractivitynowbeinglimitedtoareaswithhightransmissionriskonly.MonitoringofpesticidepoisoningistheresponsibilityofthePesticideRegistrar,DepartmentofAgriculture.

The project inception workshop broughttogether the stakeholders of AMC, DOA and

Mahaweli Authority, to jointly discuss projectobjectives, and decide on the plan of action.In subsequent workshops on curriculumdevelopment there was effective cross-sectorallearning among the health and agriculturepartners. This learning took place mostly inthe field. Health-related exercises for possibleinclusionintheIPVM-FFScurriculumwerejointlydevelopedandtestedbythesepartners.Followingthese workshops, the agricultural trainersreturned to their own locations for baselinesurveys and experimental testing of the newcurriculumintheirongoingFarmerFieldSchoolson IPM. The agricultural trainers were advisedtoinvolvePublicHealthInstructors(PHI)infieldactivities,butnospecificguidancewasprovidedonhowtoinvolvethePHIandforwhichmutualaims. Further fine-tuning of curriculum was

Thediagrambelowshowspossiblefield-leveleffects,indirectoutcomesandultimatehealtheffectsofFarmerFieldSchoolsonIPVM.IPVMFarmerFieldSchoolsareexpectedtoaffectenvironmentalmanagementandcropmanagementpracticesandthus,incomefromagriculture.Theconsequencesoftheseeffectsarereducedvectorbreeding,increasedecosystemintegrity,reducedriskofinsecticideresistance,increasedpersonalprotection,livingconditionsandsocialandempowermenteffects.Theseoutcomesinfluencehealthwithregardtovector-bornedisease,pesticidepoisoning,foodsafety,nutritionandmentalhealth.

Health impacts of IPVMBox2

Intervention Field-leveleffects

FarmerFieldSchoolon

IPVM

Environmentalmanagement

Reducedinsecticideuse

Increasedagriculturalproduction

Increasedincome

Outcomes Healthimpacts

Reducedvectorbreeding

Increasedecosystemintegrity

Reducedinsecticideresistanceinvector

Personalprotection&seekinghealthcare

Livingconditions/hygiene

Social,empowermenteffects

Vector-andwater-borne

disease

Occupationalpesticidepoisoning

Nutrition

Mentalhealth


10

alwaysconductedjointlywiththeAMCpartnersin subsequent seasonal workshops. However,the actual IPVM-FFS activities in the projectlocations were implemented exclusively by theagricultural sector with some local involvementof the PHI. Likewise, the entomological surveysand their results were discussed at semi-annualworkshops,butatthefieldlevel,noconvergenceoftheseactivitieswiththeIPVM-FFSactivitiesbytheagriculturalsectortookplace.

Consequently, there were six-month gaps inconvergence between the sectors.The AMC hasso far been playing a supplementary role byway of providing advisory services to a largelyagriculture-driven project, and by studyingthe impact of the interventions on mosquitopopulations in isolation from the agriculturalactivities. Possibly contributing to this situation,there has been lack of understanding amongthe agricultural actors about the objectives andstrategyoftheAMC.

Therefore, the AMC activities need to becomebetterintegratedwiththeproject’sfieldactivities.This can be achieved by having interactionsat common workshops at the field and districtlevels,andbyhavingalargerAMCrepresentationin central level workshops. In addition, theentomological surveys need to become bettersynchronizedwiththeIPVM-FFSactivitiestoallowformutualinteractionsandmutualbenefits.Thiscanbeachievedbyconductingtheentomologicalsurveys only on FFS days, and staying on afterthe early morning surveys to participate in theFFS session. Also, increasing the intensity ofsurveysfrom14-dayintervalstoweeklyintervalscoinciding with weekly agro-ecosystem analysisat the FFS should be considered, although suchmodificationdependsontheavailablefunds.

IPVM-FFS sessions are occasionally attended bylocalPublicHealthInspectors(PHI).Theseactors

potentiallyplayamoreactiverole,forexampleineducationonpersonalprotectionandpesticide-healthrisks.

3.3 Vector management through the FFS approach

Despitetheirdifferentgoalsofraisingagriculturalproductivity and reducing health risks due tovector borne diseases, the sectors of healthand agriculture share the future objective ofenhancingtheroleofruralcommunitiesinsoundecosystemmanagement(Figure2).

The main challenge for AMC is to internalizeIPVMintoitsownvector-bornediseasecontrolstrategy. In fact, theAMChasagreedtoadoptthe following strategy for malaria control: (i)In intensive transmission areas: Insecticidespraying(e.g.Trincomalee); (ii) In intermediatetransmission areas: Insecticide-treated bednets (ITN; mostly long-lasting bed nets); and(iii) In low transmission areas: IPVM FarmerField Schools as method of risk reduction.ThereisaprospecttoextendtheIPVMstrategyto intermediate transmission areas because ofthe demonstrated synergistic effect betweenIPVMandbednetuse(seedataonbednetusereportedbyYasuokaetal.,2006b).

Agriculture

Health

Objective:Enhancingtheroleoflocalcommunitiesinsoundecosystemmanagement

Goal:Raiseagriculturalproductivity

Goal:Reduceriskofvector-bornedisease

Figure 2: An example of how a shared objective contributes tosectorspecificgoalsinagricultureandhealth.

��IPVM–Strengthsandchallenges

Furthermore, the current surveillance system oftheAMC,aimingtodetectearlywarningsignalsofdiseaseoutbreakstoinitiatepreventiveaction,is constrained by limited human and financialresources.TheIPVMFarmerFieldSchoolapproachprovidesanopportunitytotestand/orestablishacommunity-based surveillance system. Farmershave shown that they can identify and monitorlarval and adult populations of the three majormosquitogenera,Anopheles,CulexandAedes.

Surveillancecouldbenefitfromtheinvolvementof communities by the development of localcapability on monitoring and evaluation. Thiswould provide better coverage and intervalsof data collection, allowing the AMC to targetand evaluate their interventions (e.g., IPVM-FFS;bednets)moreaccuratelyandmoretimely.Community-based surveillance would alsoenhancelocalprojectownershipandpreventiveactions taken by local people. Stronger,knowledge-based and sustained communityparticipation in managing disease vectors couldalsobeofutmostimportanceinthefuture,shouldecosystemdisruptionsfromclimatechangealterthegeographicrange(latitudeandaltitude)andseasonality of specific vector-borne diseases byboosting favourable conditions for mosquitovectorpopulations(WHO,2003).

3.4 Curriculum on IPVMThe current IPVM curriculum is based on IPMactivities. Health-related activities have beenadded, strictly focusing on vector management.The agricultural operations in wetland rice andtheconstraintsincropmanagementpracticesatdifferentcropstagesarepresentedinAnnex4.Acomparison of the week-by-week curriculum ofFarmerFieldSchoolsonIPMversusthoseonIPVMisgiveninAnnex5.Thedurationoffieldschoolswas16weeksforIPMand20weeksforIPVM,toallowformoretimeatthebeginningoftheseason

whichisthetimewhenmostmosquitobreedingtakes place. Modifications recommended bythe mission team to improve the current IPVMcurriculumareprovided.SeveralmodificationstothepresentIPVMcurriculumarediscussedintheparagraphsahead.

The mission team recommended that IPVM-FFSparticipants are more involved in the tailoringof the curriculum according to their local needsor perceived problems, and that women’sparticipationintheFFSisbasedongenderrolesinactivitiesrelatedtoagricultureANDhealth.

It was also recommended to include exerciseson self-assessment of signs and symptoms ofacute pesticide poisoning into the IPVM-FFScurriculum. Also, an exercise on householdstorageanddisposalofpesticideswassuggestedforinclusion(seeMurphyetal.,2002).Thehealthrisksassociatedwithirrigatedagriculturearenotlimited to vector-borne disease but include thepotentialharmfuleffectsofagriculturalpesticideuse,intermsofoccupationalpoisoningandfoodsafety. Other health-related effects of pesticideusearetheriskofinsecticide-resistanceindiseasevectors and the destruction of natural enemies(refer to Box 1). Potential resource persons toassistindevelopingandincorporatingthesenewexercises are the trainees of the 2001 workshopon pesticide exposure and poisoning held inBandarawela. This participatory methodologyhasademonstratedabilitytocapacitatefarmerstomonitorthehealthstatus intheircommunityresultinginpreventiveaction.

Themissionalsorecommendedabroadeningofthe IPVM-FFS activities to extend the rice-basedtraining to other crops grown by the same ricefarmersforwhichpesticidesmightalsobeused.For example, field walks during FFS sessions toobserveothercropsandutilizetheknowledgeandskillsacquiredinricetotheseothercommodities.


12

Hence, pesticide-related health risks of farmersareaddressedinamorecomprehensiveway.

The mission team furthermore noted theopportunity for introducing income-generatingactivitiestoIPVM-FFSparticipants,suchasvermi-composting, bio-composting, beekeeping, bio-controlagentproduction,paddy-strawmushroomproduction and food processing. ConsiderationshouldbegiventohaveaspecialtopicinatleastoneFFSsessiononaselectedincome-generatingactivity,forexamplebyinvitinganexpertfarmerontheissue.

Afinalobservationrelatestopracticesofplantingandweedmanagement.Drivenbyashortageoflabour, Sri Lankan rice farmers are increasinglymoving from transplanted rice and mechanicalweedingtowardsbroadcast-seededriceandtheuse of herbicides. The study plots used in theIPVM-FFSaretransplantedwithriceseedlingsandaremechanicallyweededbuttheaspectofweedmanagementisnotspecificallyaddressedinthecurriculum. The aspect of herbicide applicationandtheirpossible,butunknowneffectsofaquaticfauna need further consideration, but this is oflowerprioritythantheaboveissues.

3.5 Farmer actions after the IPVM-FFS

At the field sites visited, farmers reported thatthey were practicing a number of non-chemicalvectorcontrolmethodsasaconsequenceoftheFFS.Rearingoffishinsmallwatertanksforuseinthe community was being practiced by severalfarmers encountered, for release in some waterbodies.Also,commonvector-controlactivitiesinthe residential area were the clearing of emptycoconut shells and containers, keeping watercontainers upside down or closed with plasticbags.Concertedgroupactiononsanitationwasreported from the Udawalawe location. In the

latter location, intermittent irrigation (4 days ofwateringalternatedwith3daysofnowater)wasadministeredduringtheshortrainyseasonbytheMahaweli irrigation authority for distribution ofwater.Thereforetherewasapparentlynoreasonforfarmerstocontrolmosquitobreedinginpaddyfieldsthroughdrainage.

All farmers reported a drastic reduction intheir insecticide use as a consequence of theirparticipation in the IPVM-FFS. This is consistentwith an impact evaluation study of the IPMproject conducted in 2002 which showed areductionfrom2.2to0.4insecticideapplicationsper season attributable to the IPM-FFS (refer toBox 3). Herbicide use was not affected by theIPM-FFS,anditappearsthatthis isalsothecasefor IPVM. Another impact of the FFS was theincorporation of rice straw in the soil practicedindividuallybyalumni,resultinginhigherorganicmattercontent,retentionofwaterinthesoilandincreasingbiodiversityandproduction.

Mosquitonetsforbedswerepresentinallhousesvisited,butwerenotcommonlyusedintheshortrainy season because of high temperatures andbecauseoftherelativelylownuisanceproblemofmosquitoesduringthatseason.Still,thestudybyYasuokaetal.(2006b)conductedinthesamearearecordedthatIPVMinterventionsresultedina60%increase in bed net use, indicating an effect onawarenessaboutpersonalprotection.BednetusehassofarnotbeenpartoftheIPVMcurriculum.

ApartfromspontaneousactivitiesaftertheIPVM-FFS,theprojectfacilitatedparticipatoryplanningexercises to assist the farming community inidentifying their problems and causes of theseproblems,andtodevelopastrategyandpracticalwork plan for addressing these problems. Theprojectalsofacilitatedfarmerexperimentationintheirownfieldsbyprovidingasmallprovisionformaterialsandtocoverpossibleyieldloss.


3.6 Evaluating project implementation and impact

Monitoringandevaluationreferstoanappraisalof a project’s performance as well as itsachievements towards reaching its objectives.Conversely, impact evaluation refers to anappraisaloftheeffects,andsustainabilitythereof,resulting directly or indirectly from the projectactivities, and is measured after a project or itslocalactivitieshavecometoanendandbaselinesarecomparedtoachievedresults.

Available data on impact

Initial research findings generated during theIPVM project to date indicate that anophelinemosquito densities were less in the short rainyseason when vector breeding habitat is moreor less restricted to irrigated fields, but not inthe long rainy season when more alternativebreedinghabitatisavailable(Table3).Despitethe

sketchiness of data (records from three seasonsare missing), it is suggested that anophelinedensities,andconsequentlymalariatransmission,can most easily be interrupted in the shortrainy season through ecosystem management(reduced spraying; improved agronomic andenvironmentalpractices).

Table4showslarvaldensitiesindippersamples,based on the data by Yasuoka et al. (2006a).Paddy fields, because of their large surface areamusthaveoverwhelminglycontributedtoadultdensities of anophelines and culicines, whereasthe Aedes species were restricted to residentialareas.The agricultural use of insecticides in theearly part of the season on aquatic fauna andmosquito population dynamics requires urgentstudy.

Astudyat twosites,MahaweliHandUdawalawewith paired comparison villages, reported anincreasedknowledgeaboutmosquitoecologyand

AverageseasonalcatchesofadultAnophelesspp.inacattle-baitednettrapineachofoneIPVMinterventionvillageandonecomparisonvillageinUdawalaweduringfourrecordedseasonsoftheIPVMproject.

Table3

Season* Intervention villages

Comparison villages

Source

Long rains, 2002/03 749 1,347 Yasuokaetal.,2006a

Short rains, 2003 279 1,232 Yasuokaetal.,2006a

Long rains, 2003/04 600 781 Yasuokaetal.,2006a

Long rains, 2005/06 691 1,016 AMCunpublisheddata,2006

Larvaldensities(no.per144dippersamples)ofthreemajormosquitogenerainfivehabitattypesintwolocationsduringthefirst18monthsoftheIPVMproject(Yasuokaetal.,2006a).

Table4

Habitat Anopheles spp. Culex spp. Aedes spp.

Paddyfields 111 373 0

Irrigationcanals 4 132 0

Seepagepools 125 210 0

Tankbeds 67 97 0

Residentialareas 11 132 493


14

diseaseprevention,changedagriculturalpracticesandvectorcontrolactionsattributabletotheIPVMintervention (Yasuoka et al., 2006b). Also, a 60%increaseintheuseofmosquitonetsinhomes,wasattributedtoIPVM,eventhoughthecurriculumdidnotaddressbednetuse.Thisindicatesanincreasedawarenessandbehaviouralchangeaboutpersonalprotection and safety. Common vector controlactionswereeliminationofbreedingsites,applyingoil,saltorfishtowaterbodies(storages/containers),andcleaningupsurroundings.

ImpactstudiesofthepreviousIPMFarmerFieldSchoolproject(withoutthevectorcomponent)have shown an average reduction from 2.2 to0.4 seasonal insecticide applications in rice,anda23%increaseinyield(Box3).Theimpactswere durable over a period of at least 5 years(van den Berg, Senerath & Amarasinghe, 2002;Tripp,Wijeratne&Piyadasa,2005).Thissuggeststhat Farmer Field School training is a medium-to long-term investment. Outcomes of IPMwerenot restrictedto reduced inputcostsand

Alarge-scalenation-wideimpactstudyoftheIPM-FFSprojectin2002,whichcovered275IPMsitesand117comparisonsites,foundthata23%yieldincreasewasattributabletotheIPM-FFS.Also,theIPM-FFShadaprofoundeffectonthenumberofpesticideapplications.Insecticideswerereducedby81%.Theorganochlorineschlorpiriphosanddimethoate,andthecarbamatescarbosulfanandfenobucarbjointlyaccountedforalmost70%ofinsecticidesusedinrice.Thesechemicalshavebeenclassifiedashazardous(ClassII).FungicideusewaslowandwasfurtherreducedbyFFStraining.HerbicideusewasnotaffectedbytheFFS,andweed-managementrequiresmoreattentioninthetrainingcurriculum.

Typeofpesticide Non-IPM IPM ttest Insecticides 2.21 0.42 <0.0001 Fungicides 0.24 0.12 0.01 Herbicides 1.21 1.10 notsignificant

Thegraphbelowshowsthatinsecticideapplicationsperseasonwerelowestamongthemostrecentlytrainedfarmers(nindicatesthenumberofsites).Applicationswereslightlyhigheramongfarmerstrainedlongerago,butevenamongthegrouptrained9-13seasonsago,thenumberofapplicationswasstillonly38%thelevelofnon-IPMfarmers.Thisresultsuggeststhatthetrainingeffecterodesonlyslowly,withasubstantialeffecteven4–6yearsafterthetraining.

Source:vandenBerg,Senerath&Amarasinghe(2002)

Impacts of the IPM-FFS on pesticide useBox3

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

01–4 5–8 9–13 non–IPM

n=136

n=65

n=43

n=117


increased yields. IPM was shown to benefit allassets of rural livelihoods (natural, human,social, physical and financial) and thus helpedin alleviating poverty. In particular, farmersdevelopedcriticalthinkingandcreativitytostartnewinitiatives.Inaddition,farmerassociationswerebuiltinmanylocations.

As mentioned earlier in the text, Yasuoka et al.(2006a; 2006b) conducted external evaluationsofthepilotproject.TheresultsrefertotheoverallimpactofIPVMandcanbesupplementedbyanearlier evaluation of the IPM programme in SriLanka (van den Berg, Senerath & Amarasinghe,2002).

The IPVM curriculum as it is provides goodguidance for field activities, data collection andanalysis, and for decision-making, at the farmerlevel. But the project still lacks a completemonitoringandevaluationframeworktomeasureitsperformance.

Need for more precise monitoring and evaluation tools

For these reasons, frameworks for monitoringand impact evaluation were developed and areproposed in Annex 7 and 8. Annex 7 presentstheindicatorsandmeasurementsformonitoringFarmer Field School activities on IPVM to assessthe level of implementation of a quality controland monitoring system for ensuring standardsin the application of the IPVM in Sri Lanka andinothercountrieswheretheapproachcouldbereplicated.

Annex 8 presents a proposed framework forimpactevaluation,anddistinguishesthe impactlevelsofknowledgeandskills,resultinginchangedpracticesandeffectsatthefieldlevel,communitylevel and institutional level. At each level ofimpact, different types of impact are identified,

and indicators and methods for evaluatingimpact criteria are suggested. The frameworkdemonstratesthecomplexityofacomprehensiveevaluation of impact on IPVM. The purpose ofthecomprehensive framework is toassist in thepreparationofanoperationalplanforanimpactassessment study. In a plan, certain types andindicatorsofimpactareprioritized,inaccordancewiththeobjectivesandclientsofthestudy,andtakingintoconsiderationthelimitationsofhumanandfinancialresourcesforcarryingoutthestudy.Someofthe indicatorsandmethods inAnnex7arealreadybeingaddressedbytheIPVMproject.Specifically, the AMC is conducting fortnightlyentomological surveys on mosquito populationdensitiesandkeepsrecordsondiseaseincidenceofpublichealthimportance,whichhasbeenloworniloverthepastfewyears.

Asmall-scalebaselinesurveyinvolving28farmerswas conducted in the new project locationin Matale at the end of 2005 to collect socio-demographiccharacteristicsand informationonagricultural practices and agrochemical inputs.Thebaselinewas limited inscope.Nevertheless,it is recommended that this baseline is used toestablish longitudinal change during clusteredimplementationofIPVMactivitiesinthecomingseasons by revisiting the same farmers againduring several seasons after completion of theIPVM-FFS. It is also recommended that baselinestudiesarestartedfornewprojectlocations,bothintheinterventionvillagesandinthecomparisonvillages.

Inaddition,however,thereisneedforlatitudinalcomparisons (IPVM versus comparison villages)tocaptureanimpactonabroaderrangeofissuesand from more locations as the project activityexpands. Owing to the small size of the presentproject, all project locations should be coveredinastudy.Siteselectioncriteriaarethereforenotyetneeded.Selectionofindividualfarmerswithin


16

an FFS group needs to be conducted randomly(e.g.byselectingeverythirdpersonfromtheFFSparticipantlist).

The above paragraphs refer to a centrallydeveloped and operated impact assessmentstudy. It will also be useful to conduct aparticipatory impact study by involving IPVM-FFS alumni in the evaluation of what theyconsidered impact in their own situation. Thistype of activity not only strengthens farmerownership over their local program but alsoprovidesnewinsights intoareasof impactthatmight be missed in externally planned studies.Recommended methodology for participatoryimpact evaluation is the use of cameras byfarmerstocaptureimpactandexplainthereasonfor taking each photograph.This methodologyhas been previously used in the IPM project in2002andcouldbeconsideredforusetoevaluateimpactofIPVM(refertovandenBerg,Senerath&Amarasinghe,2002;Pontius,2003).

3.7 Expansion and replication Themissionteamnotedtheimportanceoftheclustered IPVM-FFS strategy whereby at leastone member of every farmer household in avillage participates in an FFS. This will createcriticalmassneededfordiseasemanagement.Itisfurtherrecommendedthataftergovernmenttrainers initiate IPVM-FFS in a village, alumnifarmers are trained to become FFS facilitatorsandcarryonwithfurtherFarmerFieldSchoolsinthevillage.

To expand the IPVM activities in Sri Lanka, themission recommends a lateral spread from thepresent villages towards comparison villages,whichshouldalsobenefitfromtheinterventionsafterservingforthreeyears,ascomparison.Newcomparison villages could then be selected atthe new frontier of the expanding IPVM area.

In addition, but depending on new fundingbecoming available, new IPVM locationsneed to be initiated in intermediate and hightransmission areas with a similarly clusteredimplementationofIPVM-FFStoachieveimpacton disease transmission. The mission teammoreover noted the importance of facilitatingfollow-up activities after the FFS (for example,participatory planning, action research) tostrengthen local project ownership and localinitiative.

Hence, more IPVM facilitators are needed. Inaccordance with the modifications suggestedinthecurriculum(referto3.4),thereisscopefortraining public health staff on facilitation skillsand on new educational exercises on reducinghealth risks related to pesticide use and vector-bornedisease.

BesidesitssuitabilityunderSriLankanconditions,IPVMispotentiallyreplicatableinothercountriesand other regions, as an adaptive educationalapproach, initially focusing on situations wherevector-borne diseases are associated withirrigatedriceenvironments.

3.8 Next steps MeetingswereheldinColombowith(i)DirectorAntiMalariaCampaignandDirectorEOH&FoodSafety(MOH);(ii)WHO-SriLankastaff(DrPuri,DrVerma and DrTissera) and Director EOH & FoodSafety;(iii)FAORepresentative.Therewasastrongoverall consensus about the value of the IPVM-Farmer Field School approach to involve localpeople in evaluating and reducing their health-risks related to vector-borne diseases and agro-chemicalpesticides.Theneedforfurtherdataoneffectsandimpactswasemphasisedupon.

It was also agreed that sensitization withinthe Ministry of Health and interaction with


counterparts of Agriculture at top levels is apriority.WHOproposedthefollowingplan:TheDirectorEOH,whohadjoinedthemissionteam’sfieldvisits,wouldintroduceIPVMatasessionofthe Health Development Committee Meeting,andatthesametimeannounceabriefseminaronIPVM.TheseminarwillbringtogethermajorplayersfromtheHealthMinistry,andProvincialdirectors of Health, and representatives fromtheMinistryofAgriculture,MahaweliAuthority,FAO and alumni farmers to discuss the valueof IPVM and to identify common objectives

andpossiblesynergisticeffectstothedifferentstakeholders.TheWHOagreedtoorganizeandsponsor the seminar, a timeframe for whichwouldhavetobeagreeduponsoon.

Inparallel,WHO-SEAROwillsupporttheproductionofashortvideofilmonIPVMinSriLankatargetedat policy makers. The mission findings and thevideo will serve as inputs to the regional IVMworkshop, planned for October 2006, probablyin Pondicherry, India, to discuss prospects forreplicationofIPVMinothercountries.


18

concLUsions

4.1 Conclusionsi) Theprojectisontherighttrack,andthe

mission’s findings suggest that farmerscan become masters in analyzing theiragro-ecosystems, including the vectorcomponent.

ii) TheIPVM-FFSinterventionresultsindrasticreductionsininsecticideuseinagriculture.

iii) Sustained environmental control ofmosquito breeding is being practicedby IPVM alumni, mostly in the peri-domestic environment, contributing toriskreductionofvector-bornediseasesatthecommunitylevel.

iv) Use of Mosquito nets has reportedlyincreased after IPVM-FFS participation,which suggests that IPVM amplifies thebenefits of public health services , thatthe approach improves public healthand general well being, and could also

play a key role in the performance ofprogrammes such as“Roll Back Malaria”,amplifyingthebenefits forpublichealthdeliveryservices.

v) IPVM alumni are empowered toproactively approach specialised healthteams on issues related to vector-bornediseases, creating opportunities forbetter integration of community healthprogrammes.

vi) The Anti Malaria Campaign has initiallyplayedasupplementaryroleintheIPVMproject,butisagreeingtoadoptIPVMasprevention strategy in low transmissionareas.

vii) Convergence between health andagriculturesectorshascomealongway,butneedstobefurtherstrengthened,atthefieldlevelanddistrictlevel.

��Conclusionsandrecommendations


20

rEcommEndAtions

5.1 Recommendationsi) Document and publicize the results

and effects of the IPVM project, e.g.by the preparation of a video filmand presentations at national andinternationalworkshops.

ii) There is a need to further develop theexisting monitoring and evaluationframework to ensure evidence-basedrecordingoftheproject’sperformance.

iii) Involve more health staff at the local,division and district levels, notably thePublic Health Instructors, as well asother stakeholders (school teachers,FBOs and NGOs) in field activities andworkshops.

iv) Increase convergence between theentomological surveys and the FarmerField Schools to optimize interactionand mutual benefits of these activitiesatthefieldlevel.

v) Collect data on the outcomes, effectsand impacts of IPVM. Also, studies areneededontheeffectsofagriculturaluseof pesticides on mosquito populationdynamics.

vi) Expandthecurriculumtoincludehealthrisks due to acute pesticide poisoning,and to include other crops grown byrice farmerswherepesticidesareused.Moreover,aparticipatoryassessmentoflocalproblemsisneededbeforetheFFSasabasisfortailoringthecurriculumtomeetlocalneeds.

vii) Carry out sampling of marketed fooditems to analyze the concentration ofchemical residues before and after theIPVMinterventions.

viii)Sensitize policy makers of the health,agriculture and other sectors andfacilitate discussion about commonobjectives related to IPVM to jointlydevelopafinalIPVMcurriculum.

ix) Involve communities in the surveillanceof mosquito vector populations anddevelopacommunity-basedsurveillancesystem to provide better coverageand intervals of data collection and toenhancetheownershipofruralpeopleintheevaluationandpreventiveaction forvector-bornediseasecontrol.

x) Explore possibilities to integrate IPVMas part of the response package toreducethepotentialincreaseinburdenof disease from disease vectors due toclimatechangeimpacts.

Besides its suitability under Sri Lankanconditions, IPVM is potentially replicableinothercountries (India,Myanmar,DPRK,Thailand) and other regions, definitely asanadaptiveeducationalapproach,initiallyfocusingonsituationswherevector-bornediseases are associated with irrigated riceenvironments. This perspective wouldinscribeitselfintheimplementationofthe2020GlobalPlanofActionoftheStrategicApproach to International ChemicalsManagement(SAICM).

AnnEX 1.PHoto rEPort of fiELd Visits

International mission members discussing plant defoliation experiment with Director Environmental & Occupational Health and DeputyDirectorPlantProtection(left),anddiscussingIPVMagro-ecosystemanalysismethodswithfarmers(right);Monaragala.

Farmers taking AESA samples in ricethrough direct observation, countingand measurements, tusing soup spoonsas dippers for mosquito sampling inMonaragala.

2�Annex1.Photoreportoffieldvisits

Farmerspreparingagro-ecosystemdrawingbasedontheirfieldobservationswithconclusionsonmanagementdecisions,forpresentationtothegroup.

Left: Agro-ecosystem analysis drawing by farmers displaying cropcondition, weather, water availability, beneficial and plant feedinginsects, aquatic insects including mosquito larvae and weeds at aparticularweek inthecropcycle,withanexplanationof themainfindings and decision on management actions needed in thecomingweek.

Right: A farmer presenting results of Agro-ecosystem analysis inIPVMandconventionalfieldplotstothegroupoffarmers,resultingin decision-making on management of the crop system and thevectorcomponentinthecomingweek.


22

Map of the Udawalawe location in the village ofKiriibbanwewa, showing rice tracts (in green) covered byIPVM Farmer Field Schools (the right portion of the map),residentialareas (in red)andrice tractsnotyetcoveredorbeing covered by IPVM FFS (on the left). The comparisonvillageispositionedapproximately3kmfromthisvillage.

Water jars used by farmers to study the behaviour andlifecycleofaquaticinsects.Thesejarscontainedanophelinemosquitoes (larvae, pupae and emerging adults), culicinemosquitoesandfishpredatorsfeedingonmosquitolarvae.

IPVMalumnifarmersstagingadramaonmosquitonuisance,diseasetransmission,andenvironmentalcontrolmethods.

2�Annex1.Photoreportoffieldvisits

Discussion about a participatory planning exercise byIPVMalumnifarmerstoanalysecausesandeffectsof localproblems, identify possible solutions and develop a workplanforcommunityaction.

MissionteammembersdiscussingentomologicaldatawithAMCentomologicalteamatnewprojectlocationinMatale.

AMCstaffinMataledisplayingcattle-baitednettrapusedforadultmosquitosampling.Onetrapisusedinthecentreoftheinterventionvillageandoneinthecomparisonvillage.Theothertypeoftrapusedisthecattle-baitedhuttrap.Theformertrapisconsideredbetterforcatchingoutdoorbitingmosquitoes,thelatterforindoorbitingmosquitoes.


24

FacilitatorinIPVMfieldschoolsessioninMataradistrictintroducingaspecialtopiconmosquitoidentificationandsamplingatthebeginningoftheseasoninthewetzoneofSriLanka.

2�

Farmerexplainingresultsofhisownresearchbasedonobservationsofpest/predatorinteractions

Annex1.Photoreportoffieldvisits

AnnEX 2.fiELd-LEVEL AcHiEVEmEnts of tHE ProjEct to dAtE

A. Farmer Field Schools on IPVM

NumberofFarmer-Field-SchoolsonIPVMimplementedinprojectlocationsperseason

B. Entomological surveys by the AMC

FortnightlysurveysofmosquitovectorsconductedbytheAMCinprojectvillagesandpairedcomparisonvillages,indicatedby‘X’.

District or system

Village Yala 02

Maha 02/03

Yala 03

Maha 03/04

Yala 04

Maha 04/05

Yala 05**

Maha 05/06

Yala 06

1 MahaweliH Talawa(D) 1 3 3 4 3

2 Udawalawe Kiriibbanwewa 1 3 3 3 1 3 1 1

3 Monaragala Buttala 1 2 2 2 2 2 1

4 Matale Lenadora(N) 1 1

5 MahaweliC Weheragala(N) 1 1

6 MahaweliG Diyabeduma(N) 1 1

7 Matara Variousvillages(N) 2 2 2

8 Hambantota Meegahajandura(N) 2 1 1

9 Puttalam Nawagattegama(D) 1 2 1 1

10 Vavuniya Unknown(D) 1 1 1

11 Trincomalee Unknown(D) 1

District or system

Village Yala 02

Maha 02/03

Yala 03

Maha 03/04

Yala 04

Maha 04/05

Yala 05**

Maha 05/06

Yala 06

1 MahaweliH Talawa(D) X X X X

2 Udawalawe Kiriibbanwewa X X X X X X X X

3 Monaragala Buttala

4 Matale Lenadora(N) X X

5 MahaweliC Weheragala(N)

6 MahaweliG Diyabeduma(N)

7 Matara Variousvillages(N)

8 Hambantota Meegahajandura(N)

9 Puttalam Nawagattegama(D)


26

C. Field studies

Fieldexperimentsbytrainersand/orfarmersontheeffectsofagriculturalpracticesonpopulationsofmosquitoesandotheraquaticinsects

District or system

Village Yala 02

Maha 02/03

Yala 03

Maha 03/04

Yala 04

Maha 04/05

Yala 05**

Maha 05/06

Yala 06

1 MahaweliH Talawa(D)

2 Udawalawe Kiriibbanwewa 3 3 1 4 1 1

3 Monaragala Buttala 1 2 2 2 2 2

4 Matale Lenadora(N) 1 1

5 MahaweliC Weheragala(N) 1 1 1

6 MahaweliG Diyabeduma(N) 1 1

7 Matara Variousvillages(N) 1 2 2

8 Hambantota Meegahajandura(N) 2 2

9 Puttalam Nawagattegama(D) 3 1 1

10 Vavuniya Unknown(D) 1

2�Annex2.Field-levelachievementsoftheprojecttodate

AnnEX 3.oVErViEw of conVErgEncE

ConvergenceofactivitiesbetweenagricultureandhealthsectorswithintheIPVMproject.Thecentrecolumnindicatesactivitieswhereconvergenceoccurred.

Timeline Activities by Agriculture

Convergence of activities Activities by Health

Before 2002 FarmerFieldSchoolsonIPMandcropmanagement

Talawa(D) Routineentomologicalsurveys;Communityhealthactivities;Insecticidesapplicationforvectorcontrolinhigh-riskareas

2001 Projectdevelopmentactivitiesinitiatedjointlybyprojectstakeholders

Mar 02 Inceptionworkshop:StakeholdersagreedonIPVMobjectivesandactionplan

Apr 02May 02

Curriculumdevelopmentworkshops:AMCandagriculturalpartnersinvolvedincross-sectorallearninginthefield;jointexperimentationwithnewtrainingtools

May 02 Surveyonfarmerknowledge/perceptionsbytrainersintheirownrespectivelocations

Jun-Jul 02 FieldtestingofnewcurriculumbyIPVMtrainersintheirownspecificlocations

Aug 02 (and again in Apr 03)

Technicalworkshops:Jointlyfine-tuningofIPVMcurriculum;discussionofentomologicalsurveys


28

Timeline Activities by Agriculture

Convergence of activities Activities by Health

Nov 02 -Feb 03

FarmerFieldSchoolsonIPVMbyagriculturaltrainers

Entomologicalsurveysininterventionandcontrolvillages

Beginning of every season starting Apr 03

Seasonalplanningworkshops:SharingofresultsofFFSandfieldexperiments;separateplanningbyAgricultureandHealth

Every season FarmerFieldSchoolsonIPVMbyagriculturaltrainers;occasionallyattendedbyPublicHealthInspector

Entomologicalsurveysininterventionandcontrolvillages

2�Annex3.Overviewofconvergence

AnnEX 4.AgricULtUrAL oPErAtions in ricE

Agricultural operations

AgriculturaloperationsandconstraintsinwetlandricecropmanagementpracticesinrelationtotheFFSsessionsandcropage.RefertothecorrespondingFFScurriculuminAnnex5.

DAS* Crop Stage

Agricultural Operations

Constraints in crop management practices

-35 n/a n/a n/a

-28 n/a n/a n/a

-21 n/a Impoundwatertofields Delayedwaterissuance;delayedrain

-14 Landpreparation

Firstploughing Shallowploughingdepth

-7 Landpreparation

Secondploughing;after6days:puddling,levellingandbasalapplicationoffertilizers

Shortintervalbetweenfirstandsecondploughingleadingtopoorweedcontrol;unleveledfieldplots

0 Cropestablishment

Sowingortransplanting;after3days:irrigating

Highorunevenplantdensity;sub-optimalbasalapplicationoffertilizers;declineintransplantingpractices;opportunitiesformosquitovectorproliferation;unleveledfieldplots

7 Seedling Opportunitiesformosquitovectorproliferation;prophylacticapplicationofinsecticides

14 Tillering Drainage;weedcontrol;firsttopdressing

Dependencyofchemicalherbicides;prophylacticapplicationofinsecticides;opportunitiesformosquitovectorproliferation

21 Secondweeding;irrigation

Sometimessecondherbicideapplication;dependencyoninsecticides;opportunitiesformosquitovectorproliferation

28 Opportunitiesformosquitovectorproliferation;dependencyoninsecticides

35 Pestmanagement;secondtopdressing

Dependencyonchemicalinsecticidesforinsectcontrol;impropertiminganddosageofurea

42 Panicleinitiation

Pestmanagement,irrigation

Dependencyonchemicalinsecticidesforinsectcontrol


30

DAS* Crop Stage

Agricultural Operations

Constraints in crop management practices

49 Booting Pestmanagement,irrigation

Sameasabove

56 Pestmanagement Sameasabove

63 Pestmanagement Sameasabove

70 Flowering Thirdtopdressing Dependencyonchemicalinsecticidesforinsectcontrol;impropertiminganddosageofurea

77 Ripening Dependencyoninsecticidesforricebugcontrol

84 Sameasabove

91 Poordrainage

98 None

105 Mature Harvesting None

112 None None None

��Annex4.Agriculturaloperationsinrice

*DAS=Daysaftersowing.

AnnEX 5. cUrricULUm on iPm VErsUs iPVm

DAS*

FFS**

Description of IPM FFS activities

FFS**

Description of IPVM FFS activities

Suggested modifications

-35 DevelopM&Eimplementationplan;Selectionofvillages;Engagelocalagric.&healthauthorities&schoolteachers;Participatorybaselinesurvey

-28 Pre-FFSmeeting:SelectingofFFSgroupandparticipants,explainingFFSprogram,identifyinglocalneeds,baselinesurvey

Nobaselinesurvey

-21 1 Determiningcurriculum,identifyingexperimentalplots,incorporatingricestrawand/orotherorganicmatter

Add:consolidatingcurriculumwithFFSparticipantsaccordingtolocalneeds

-14 2 Exercises:Identificationofmosquitolarvae(Anopheles,Culex);beginlarvalsampling

Nomodification

-7 Pre-FFSmeeting:SelectingofFFSgroupandparticipants,explainingFFSprogram,identifyinglocalneeds,identifyingexperimentalplots,incorporationofricestrawandotherorganicmatter

3 Layingoutfieldplotsforstudies;mosquitolarvaldippersamplinginploughedfields;determiningcurriculum;determiningseedratesandbasalfertilizerforfieldplots

Nomodification

ComparisonofthecurriculumoffarmerfieldschoolsonIPMversusIPVM,andsuggestedadditionsormodificationstoimprovetheIPVMcurriculum.Thetime-specificFFSactivitiescanberelatedtocropstageandagriculturaloperationsbyreferringtothecorrespondingtimescaleinAnnex4.


32

DAS*

FFS**


FFS**



0 1 Layingoutfieldplots,determiningcurriculum,determiningseedrates&basalfertilizerforfieldplots.

4 Larvalsamplinginpaddyfields;identificationofmosquitogenerafacilitatedbyAMCOfficers

Add:specialtopiconvector-bornediseasecycleincludingtransmissionAdd:assignmenttostudythelifecycleofmosquitoesathome

7 2 Introduceagro-ecosystemanalysis(AESA);collectionandidentificationofnaturalenemiesandplantfeedinginsects;groupdynamicexercise;specialtopicongrowthstagesofriceplantandnutrition

5 Introduceagro-ecosystemanalysis(AESA);collectionandidentificationofnaturalenemiesandplantfeedinginsects;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicexercise;specialtopiconmosquitotypesandidentificationoflarvaeandadults

Add:presentationofresultsoflifecyclestudy

14 3 AESAactivities(fieldobservations,drawing,analysis,grouppresentation,discussion);introductionofmechanicalweedcontrol;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconweedcontrolandfertilizerrequirementforfirsttopdressing

6 AESAactivities(fieldobservations,drawing,analysis,grouppresentationanddiscussion);larvalmosquitosampling;mechanicalweedcontrol;groupdynamicexercise;exerciseonlarvalpredationbyaquaticnaturalenemies;specialtopiconweedcontrol&fertilizerrequirementforfirsttopdressing

Add:villagewalktoidentifymosquitobreedingplacesinthesurroundingenvironment;managementpracticestoeliminatevectorbreeding

21 4 AESAactivities;initiatefieldstudiesondefoliation&detillering;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconleafeatingcaterpillars

7 AESAactivities;larvalsampling;initiatedefoliation&detilleringstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopicongrowthstagesofriceplantandearlypestsandtheirmanagement;assignmenttostudythelifecycleofmosquitoesathome

Add:introductionofcupstudiesonpredationofmosquitoesandassignmentofcupstudiesathomeRemove:assignmentonlifecyclestudy

28 5 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconinternalfeeders

8 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;presentationoflifecyclestudyresults;specialtopiconriceinternalfeedersandtheirmanagement;introducecupstudiesonpredation

Add:presentationofresultsoncupstudiesonpredationRemove:presentationonlifecyclestudy

��Annex5.CurriculumonIPMversusIPVM

DAS*

FFS**


FFS**



35 6 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies&cupstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;fertilizerrequirementforsecondtopdressing;specialtopiconbrownplanthoppermanagementanditsnaturalenemies

9 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;fertilizerrequirementforsecondtopdressing;specialtopiconvector-bornediseasesandtransmission

Add:Specialtopiconself-assessmentofsignsandsymptomsofacutepoisoningRemove:specialtopiconvector-bornediseases

42 7 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;inspectplantsforpanicleinitiation;specialtopiconbootingstageandwaterrequirement

10 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;inspectplantsforpanicleinitiation;specialtopiconbootingstageandwaterrequirement

Nomodification

49 8 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudiesandcupstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;inspectplantsforpanicleinitiation;specialtopiconpaddybugmanagementanditsnaturalenemies

11 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;inspectplantsforpanicleinitiation;specialtopiconpaddybugmanagementanditsnaturalenemies

Add:villagewalktoobserveothercropsandhomegardeningbyparticipantstodiscusspestmanagementissues

56 9 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudiesandcupstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconflowering,pollinationandfertilization

12 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies&cupstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconflowering,pollinationandfertilization;villagewalktoidentifymosquitobreedingplacesinthesurroundingenvironment

Nomodification

63 10 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies&cupstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconripeningphase

13 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudiesandcupstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconripeningphase;assignmenttoexaminevectorbreedingplacesintheirowngardensandhomesandlistthem

Nomodification


34

DAS*

FFS**


FFS**



70 11 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudiesandcupstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopicontheimportanceandrateofthethirdtopdressing

14 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudiesandcupstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopicontheimportanceandrateofthirdtopdressing;reportingofresultsonmosquitobreedingplaces;managementpracticestoeliminatebreeding

Nomodification

77 12 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudiesandcupstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconmaintainingpurityofricevarieties

15 AESAactivities;maintenanceoffieldstudies&cupstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconmaintainingpurityofricevarieties

Add:villagewalktoobserveothercropsandhomegardeningbyparticipantstodiscusspestmanagementissues

84 13 Maintenanceoffieldstudies&cupstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconvarietiesofrice

16 Maintenanceoffieldstudies&cupstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconvarietiesofrice

Add:specialtopiconhouseholdstorageanddisposalofpesticidesRemove:specialtopiconvarietiesofrice

91 14 Maintenanceoffieldstudies&cupstudies;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconproducinggoodseedpaddy

17 Maintenanceoffieldstudies&cupstudies;larvalmosquitosampling;groupdynamicsexercise;specialtopiconproducinggoodseedpaddy

Nomodification

98 15 Analyzingdataonproductiveandnon-productivetillers,pest&naturalenemycounts,populationfluctuations,etc.

18 Analyzingdataonproductiveandnon-productivetillers,pest&naturalenemycounts,populationfluctuations,etc.Examinemosquitobreedingplacesinirrigationcanals

Add:specialtopiconincomegeneratingactivity,e.g.composting,poultry,beekeeping,bio-agentproduction,paddystrawmushroomproduction,foodprocessing

105 16 Afterharvestingofstudyplots:analyzingofdataoncropyields,naturalenemies,pests,etc.

19 Afterharvestingofstudyplots:analyzingofdataoncropyields,naturalenemies,pests,etc.

Add:marketingand/orvalueadditionofproduce

112 20 Post-FFSmeetingtodiscuss/obtainfeedbackfromfarmersandreinforceIPVMpractices

Nomodification

��Annex5.CurriculumonIPMversusIPVM

*DAS=daysaftersowing;**FFS=numberofweeklyFFSsession

AnnEX 6.PrEsEnt And PotEntiAL stAkEHoLdErs in iPVm

Boldtextindicatesstakeholdersthathavebeenexposed(eitherinthefieldorinmeetings)totheIPVMProject.Textinitalicsindicatespotentialstakeholdersthathavesofarnotbeenexposedtotheproject.

Agriculture Mahaweli settlements *

Health Environ- ment

Edu- cation

Admin- istration

Super Minister,FAO

Minister Minister,WHO

Minister,UNDP,UNEP

Minister,UNICEF

Policy Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary

Department DGAariculture

DGMahaweli

DGHealthServices,DyDGPublicHealthServices

ChairNationalEnviron-mentAuthority

DGEducation

Division PlantProtection

Extension DirectorAqriculturalDevelop-ment

DirEOH&FoodSafety;otherdirectors

DirAntiMalariaCampaiqn

Provincial Prov.DirAariculture ResidentProiectManaqer

Prov.DirHealthServices

DyDirEnviron-ment

Prov.DirEducation

ChiefMinister,ChiefSecretary

District DvDirAqriculture BlockManaqer

RegiomlDirHealthServices

ReqionalMalariaOfficer

DyDirEducation

DistrSecretary

Segment/ division

AsstDirAqricultureSubiectMatterSpecialists

UnitManaqer

MedicalOfficerofHealth

Surveyteam

DivisionalEnviron-mentOfficer

DivisionalDirEduc,AsstDir(perdiscipline)

DivisionalSecretary

Local AariculturallnstructorsIPMtrainers

FieldAssistants

PublicHealthInspectors;midwives

Schoolprincipals,teachers

GramaNiladari(VillageHead)

Field FARMINGCOMMUNITIES

Leve

l

Discipline/sector


36

*ForMahaweliAuthority:provinciallevel=systemlevel;districtlevel=blocklevel;segmentlevel=unitlevel;locallevel=FAlevel

AnnEX 7.ProPosEd indicAtors for monitoring fiELd ActiVitiEs

Category Aspect Indicators and measurements

General Pre-FFSmeeting Didittakeplace?Numberofparticipants;numberofwomen

WhenwasfirstFFSsession? Indicatenumberofweeksbeforethetimeofplanting

Meetingplace Type(undertheshadeofatree,shelter,house,school)

Distancemeetingplacefromfieldplot

Inmetres

FFSfieldplots Presence;area(m²)

IPVMplot Transplanted/seeded;ricestrawincorporation(Yes/No);typeofweedingpracticed

Farmerpracticeplot GenuinefarmerpracticeorfollowsIPVMtreatment?

People FFSparticipantspresent NumberofpersonsattendingFFSsession

Womenparticipation Number;involvementinaspectsonagriculture/health

Publichealthinspectorpresence Yes/No

AMCstaffpresent Yes/No

Districtordivisionalstaffpresent Indicate

Potentialfarmertrainers NumberofparticipantswithqualitiesofFFSfacilitatorifgiventheopportunityofadditionaltraining

Materials Refreshments Available/provided;adequacy

Stationary Available/provided;adequacy(writingpads,pens,newsprintpaper,colourmarkers;measuringruler)

Mosquito-relatedmaterials Available/provided;adequacy(soupspoonsasdippers,plasticcups,plasticcontainers,sweepnets)

��Annex7.Proposedindicatorsformonitoringfieldactivities

Category Aspect Indicators and measurements

Activities Fieldobservations Numberofsub-groups;numberofparticipantsenterthepaddyfieldforobservations

AESAdrawing Indicateaspectsindrawingviz.,plant,waterlevel,naturalenemies,pests,mosquitoes,weeds,weathercondition,managementdecisions

AESApresentation DoparticipantstaketurnsinpresentingAESAdata?Dowomenpresent?IsIPVMcomparedwiththefarmerpractice?Isthereadiscussionaftereachpresentation?

Specialtopic Takesplace(Yes/No);type;relevancetocropstage;qualityofprocess(e.g.lectureordiscoverylearningexercise?)

Groupdynamicsexercise Takesplace(Yes/No);nameofexercise;isexplanation/interpretationoftheexerciseconducted?

Defoliation&detilleringtrial Practiced;quality(numberofricehills,treatments)

Cupstudies Arecupsorcontainersusedbyparticipantsforhomeassignmentsonlifecyclesorpredationstudies?

Miscellaneousactivities Givedescriptions

Other Facilitator Doesthefacilitatorenterthepaddyfield?Doesfacilitatorprovidereadyanswers/instructions/lectures?Areparticipantsencouragedtofindouttheanswersbythemselves?Istherealivelyinteractionwithparticipants?

Generalatmosphere Describe(e.g.formal,cheerful,indifferent,motivated)

StartingtimeofFFSsession(hr) Time

DurationofFFSsession(hours) Hours


38

Impact level Impact type Indicators Methods

Knowledge and skills

Knowledgeaboutagro-ecology

Abletoidentifypests,naturalenemies,plantnutritionalrequirements;understandbiology,functionalrelationships,nutrientcycles

Semi-structuredquestionnaire

Knowledgeaboutvectorecology,diseasecyclesandtransmission

Abletoidentifymosquitogenera;understandvectorbiology,breeding,andtransmissionandreservoirofdisease


Knowledgeaboutpesticideeffects

Knowstoxicitycategories;awareofeffectsonhealthandenvironment;awareofalternativestopesticides(plant-basedorbiologicalproducts)


Cropmanagementskills Knowsappropriateagronomicpracticesandpestmanagementdecision-making

Openquestionnaire

Vectormanagementskills Knowswhen,whereandhowtoeliminatevectorbreeding

Openquestionnaire

Criticalanalyticskills Knowshowtoanalyzecomplexagro-ecosystemdataresultinginevidence-baseddecision-making;knowshowtoexperiment;understandsfarm-leveleconomicanalysis

Openquestionnaire

Socialskills Abilitytoexpressandcommunicateviews;understandstheimportanceofcollectiveaction

Openquestionnaire

��Annex8.Proposedframeworkforimpactassessment

AnnEX 8.ProPosEd frAmEwork forimPAct AssEssmEnt


Change in practices

Improvedcropmanagement

Numberofploughings;ricestrawincorporationinsoil;balancedfertilizerapplication;plantingmethod;weedingmethod;irrigationanddrainage;farmersconducteconomicanalysis


Pesticideuse Frequency,amountandtypeofpesticide;toxicitycategoryofpesticides;mixing;targetingofpests;facilityforhouseholdstorage;disposalofpesticides

Semi-structuredquestionnaire;localpesticideoutletsales

Vectormanagementactivities

Typeofwaterstoragestructures/bodiesdrainedoreliminated;frequencyofactions;scaleofoperations;numberofcontainers,coconutshellsetc.

Openquestionnaire

Personalprotection Useofmosquitonetsforbedsbyfamilymembers;useofrepellents(plant-based;chemical)


Innovations Newpracticesofcropmanagementorvectormanagement

Openquestionnaire;interviews

Changeonsocial/politicalrelations

CommunicateIPVMwithotherstakeholders;engageincooperativeactiononthemanagementofvectorsorcrops


Field level effects Agriculturalproduction Cropyield;qualityofproduce;pesticideresiduesinproduce;marketability


Vectorlarvalandadultdensities

Dippersamplesoflarvaldensitiesinvarioushabitats;adultmosquitocatches

AMCdata;communitydrivensurveys

Ecosystemintegrity Densityanddiversityofaquaticfaunaandfaunaabovethewatersurface;organicmattercontentinsoil

AESAdata;trainerstudies

Economicbenefits Inputcosts;laborcost;opportunitycost;saleofproduce



40


Community level impacts

Collectiveactionforpestorvectorcontrol

Numberofpeopleinvolved;frequencyandtypeofactions


Changeingenderroles Women’sroleindecision-makingonvectorcontrolorpersonalprotection;women’sroleinfieldactivitiesandconcertedactivities

Stratificationofalldataforgender;interviews

Incidenceofvector-bornediseaseofpublichealthimportance

Numberoflocallyreportedcases

Localhospitalregistryandlaboratorydata;AMCdata

Incidenceofpesticidepoisoning

Incidenceofsignsandsymptomsamongfarmersandsprayoperators;incidenceofpoisoningatthehouseholdlevel;re-useordisposalofemptycontainers;chemicalresiduesonfood

Localhospitalregistryandlaboratorydata;community-drivensurveys

Change at the institutional level

Increasedinter-sectoralcollaborationandintegration

Jointworkshops;jointfieldvisits;integrationoffieldactivities

Documentation;interviews

Changeinimmediateobjectives,implementationstrategy,policies

Newactivities;newregulations;jobdescriptions;budgetallocations;involvementofpublichealthinspectors


Impactonresearchagenda

Trans-disciplinaryresearchinitiated;fieldvisitsbyresearchers;researcher-farmerinteractions;farmerparticipationinresearchforums


4�Annex8.Proposedframeworkforimpactassessment

AnnEX 9.LitErAtUrE consULtEd

Das PK (1990). Community participation in vector disease control: facts and fancies. Int.Colloquium,Price Leopold Institute of Tropical Medicine,Belgium.

GallagherKD(1984).Effects of host plant resistance on the microevolution of the rice brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens (Stål) (Homoptera: Delphacidae).PhDthesis,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley.

IRRI ed. (1988). Vector-borne disease control in humans through rice agroecosystem management. In: Proc. Workshop, WHO/FAO/UNEP Panel ofExpertsonEnvironmentalManagementofVectorControl.IRRI,LosBaños,Philippines.237pp.

KeiserJ,SingerBHandUtzingerJ(2005).Reducingtheburdenofmalariaindifferenteco-epidemiologicalsettings with environmental management: asystematicreview.Lancet,5,695–708.

Kenmore PE, Carino CA, Dyck VA & GuttierrezAP (1984). Population regulation of the rice bron planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens Stål) within rice fields in the Philippines. J. Plant Prot. Tropics, 1,19–37.

KlinkenbergE,vanderHoekW&AmerasingheFP(2004). A malaria risk analysis in an irrigated in anirrigatedareainSriLanka. Acta Tropica,89,215–225.

Lindsay S, Kirby M, Baris E and Bos R (2004).Environmental management for malaria control in the East Asia and Pacific (EAP) Region. Health,

Nutrition and Population Discussion Paper. TheWorldBank,Washington.

Murphy HH, Hoan NP, Matteson P and Morales-AbubakarALC(2002).Farmer’sself-surveillanceofpesticidepoisoning:a12-monthpilotinnorthernVietnam.Int J Occup Env Health,8,202–213.

Pontius JC (2003). Picturing impact: participatory evaluation of community IPM in three West Java villages. In CIP-UPWARD (Ed.), Farmer Field Schools: Emerging issues and challenges (pp. 227–260). LosBaños:UPWARD.

Pontius JC, Dilts R & Bartlett A (eds.) (2002). Ten years of IPM training in Asia – from farmer field school to communityIPM.Bangkok:FAO.

SmitLAM,vanWendeldeJoodeBN,HeederikD,Peiris-JohnRJ,&vanderHoekW(2003).Effectsofoccupational pesticide exposure on symptomsand acetyl cholinesterase inhibition among SriLankan farmers. American Journal of Industrial Medicine,44,254–264.

TrippR,WijeratneM&PiyadasaVH(2005).Whatshould we expect from farmer field schools? ASri Lanka case study. World Development, 33,1705–1720.

van den Berg H & Jiggins J (2006). Investing infarmers: The impacts of farmer field schools inrelation to integrated pest management. WorldDevelopment(inpress).


42

van den Berg H & Knols BGJ (2006).The farmerfield school: A method for enhancing the roleof ruralcommunities inmalariacontrol? Malaria Journal,5,3.

vandenBergH,SenerathH&AmarasingheL(2002).Participatory IPM in Sri Lanka: a broad-scale and an in-depth impact analysis. ReportpreparedfortheFAOProgrammeforCommunityIPMinAsia,Jakarta.

WHO (2003). Climate change and human health: risks and responses. Summary.Availableathttp://www.who.int/globalchange/climate/summary/en/index.html

WHO (2004a). World Health Report 2004; AnnexTables2and3.

WHO(2004b).Global Strategic Framework on IVM. WHO, Geneva. Available at http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2004/WHO_CDS_CPE_PVC_2004_10.pdf

Yasuoka J, Levins R, Mangione TW & SpielmanA (2006a). Community-based rice ecosystemmanagement for suppressing vector anopheliesin Sri Lanka. Trans. Royal Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. (E-publicationaheadofprint).

Yasuoka J, Mangione TW, Spielman A & LevinsR (2006b). Impact of education on knowledge,agriculturalpractices,andcommunityactionsformosquito control and mosquito-borne diseasepreventioninriceecosystemsinSriLanka.Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.,74,1034–1042.

4�Annex9.Literatureconsulted

Day Date Activity

Fri 9-Jun-06 TravelHvdB

Sat 10-Jun-06 TravelAvH

Sun 11-Jun-06 TravelPKD&VR

Mon 12-Jun-06 MeetwithWHO,FAO;PMtraveltoKandy

Tue 13-Jun-06 MeetwithstakeholdersatPlantprotection,DOASeminaronIPVMatPGGI,PeradeniyaPM:traveltoEmbilipitiya

Wed 14-Jun-06 VisitKiriibbanwewafieldlocation(FFSalumni),meetlocalpartners,discussions

Thu 15-Jun-06 VisitMonaragalafieldlocation(ongoingFFS);PM:traveltoKandy

Fri 16-Jun-06 VisitMatalefieldlocation(ongoingFFS),visitAMCactivities;PM:debriefingwithmajorstakeholdersinKandy

Sat 17-Jun-06 AvHdeparts;Discussion,reporting

Sun 18-Jun-06 PKD&VRDepart;HvdBtravelwithcounterpartstoMatarafieldlocations

Mon 19-Jun-06 AM:VisitSeenipellafieldlocation;PM:visitTallalefieldlocation(alumni)

Tue 20-Jun-06 TraveltoColombo;PM:meetwithFAORepresentative

Wed 21-Jun-06 MeetingwithDirectorAntiMalariaCampaignandDirectorEnvironmental&OccupationalHealthandFAO;reporting

Thu 22-Jun-06 PresentationofmissionfindingsandplanningofnextstepsatWHO;reporting

Fri 23-Jun-06 Reporting

Sat 24-Jun-06 HvdBdeparts

Missionmembers:AvH=AvonHildebrand;PKD=PKDas;VR=VRagunathan;HvdB=HvandenBerg


44

AnnEX 10.mission ProgrAmmE

Name Affiliation/address Contact details

Mission members:

DrVRagunathan PlantProtectionAdvisortotheGovernmentofIndia(Rtd),andFAO-IPMConsultant

Tel:+914424513892Email:[email protected]

DrPKDas Director.VectorControlResearchCentre(IndianCouncilofMedicalResearch),IndiraNagar,Pondicherry605006,India

Tel:+914132272422Mobile:9894606422Email:[email protected]@gmail.com

MrAlexvonHildebrand RegionalAdvisor,EnvironmentalHealth.WHOSouth-EastAsiaRegionalOffice,I.P.Estate,NewDelhi-110002,India

Tel:+911122309440,23370804Email:[email protected]

DrHenkvandenBerg Consultant.FDRooseveltstraat29,9728RVGroningen,TheNetherlands

Tel:+31505251855Email:[email protected]@gmail.com

Persons met:

DrATissera NationalProfessionalOfficer,WHO.226,BauddhalokaMawatha,Colombo-07,SriLanka

Tel:+94112502842Mobile:0773043323Email:[email protected]

DrSPuri TechnicalOfficer(Programme&Management),WHO.226,BauddhalokaMawatha,Colombo-07,SriLanka


DrBVerma TechnicalOfficer(EHA),WHO.226,BauddhalokaMawatha,Colombo-07,SriLanka


MrNalinMunasinghe ProgrammeAssociate,FAO.202,BauddhalokaMawatha,Colombo-07,SriLanka

Tel:+94112580798ext13Mobile:0773-659058Email:[email protected]

DrCKShanmugarajah Director.EnvironmentalOccupationalHealthandFoodSafety,MinistryofHealth,Colombo,SriLanka

Email:[email protected]:+94112672004

MrHectorSenerath NationalConsultant,IPVMProject.FAO,51/2,Thotagamuwa,Palapathwela,Matale,SriLanka


MrKPiyasena DeputyDirectorPlantProtection,PlantProtectionandSeedCertification,DepartmentofAgriculture,Peradeniya,SriLanka


4�Annex11.Contactdetailsandpersonsmet

AnnEX 11.contAct dEtAiLs And PErsons mEt


46

Name Affiliation/address Contact details

MrMUPJayasundara AgricultureOfficer.PlantProtectionService,PlantProtectionandSeedCertification,DepartmentofAgriculture,Peradeniya,SriLanka


MrNBMunasinghe RegionalMalariaOfficer,AntiMalariaCampaign,Embilipitiya,SriLanka

Email:[email protected]

DrGKManuweera PesticideRegistrar.PlantProtectionandSeedCertification,DepartmentofAgriculture,Peradeniya,SriLanka


DrMrsFernando Director.PlantProtectionandSeedCertification,DepartmentofAgriculture,Peradeniya,SriLanka

Email:[email protected]@sltnet.lk

MrGDPerera DirectorAgriculturalDevelopment,MahaweliAuthorityofSriLanka


DrLSiyambalagoda Director,AntiMalariaCampaign(AMC),Colombo,SriLanka

Tel:+94112581918or2588947Email:[email protected]

MrHMohamedFaizal RegionalMalariaOfficer,AntiMalariaCampaign,Monaragala,SriLanka

Tel+94552276698

DrManelYapabandara RegionalMalariaOfficer,AntiMalariaCampaign,Matale,SriLanka

el:+94662222295Email:[email protected]

MrPoteChumsri FAORepresentativeinSriLankaandMaldives,FAO.202,BauddhalokaMawatha,Colombo-07,SriLanka

Tel:+94112580798Mobile:0777-686880Email:[email protected]

ProfManeldeWijesundera

ProfessorofParasitology.DeptofParasitology,FacultyofMedicine,UniversityofPeradeniya,SriLanka


MrsHDayani FieldAssistant/IPVMTrainer.MASL,Kiriibbanwewaunit,UdaWalaweSpecialProject,Embilipitiya,SriLanka

MrWWimalaratne SubjectMatterOfficer/IPVMTrainer.DistrictAgricultureOffice,Monaragala,SriLanka

Tel:+94552276110

MrAMJayasekera Actg.A.O/IPVMTrainer.DistrictAgricultureOffice,Monaragala,SriLanka

Tel:+94552276110

MrGunaratne IPVMTrainer.DOA,Matara

MrsLalaniRamanayake MonitoringOfficer/IPVMTrainer.DistrictAgricultureOffice,GabadaVeediya,Matara,SriLanka

Tel:+94412222350

evaluation of the integrated pest and vector management ...apps.searo.who.int/pds_docs/b0393.pdf ·...

Documents