NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by the US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service (Agreement 59-0790-8-053); the W. K. Kellogg Foundation (Grant P0056838); and the National Science Foundation (Grant DEB-9903431). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-07132-1
Additional copies of this report are available from National Academy Press
, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area); Internet: http://www.nap.edu
Printed in the United States of America
Copyright 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
National Academy of Sciences
National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Medicine
National Research Council
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
BOARD ON AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES
T. KENT KIRK, Chair,
University of Wisconsin, Madison
DAVID H. BAKER,
University of Illinois, Urbana
SANDRA S. BATIE,
Michigan State University, East Lansing
MAY R. BERENBAUM,
University of Illinois, Urbana
ANTHONY S. EARL,
Quarles & Brady Law Firm, Madison, Wisconsin
ESSEX E. FINNEY, JR.,
Mitchellville, Maryland (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, retired)
CORNELIA B. FLORA,
Iowa State University, Ames
ROBERT T. FRALEY,
Monsanto Co., St. Louis, Missouri
GEORGE R. HALLBERG,
The Cadmus Group, Inc., Waltham, Massachusetts
RICHARD R. HARWOOD,
Michigan State University, East Lansing
GILLBERT A. LEVEILLE,
Leveille Associates, Denville, New Jersey
HARLEY W. MOON,
Iowa State University, Ames
WILLIAM L. OGREN,
Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, (U.S. Department of Agriculture, retired)
G. EDWARD SCHUH,
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
JOHN W. SUTTIE,
University of Wisconsin, Madison
THOMAS N. URBAN,
Des Moines, Iowa (Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., retired)
ROBERT P. WILSON,
Mississippi State University, Mississippi State
JAMES J. ZUICHES,
Washington State University, Pullman
WARREN R. MUIR, Executive Director
CHARLOTTE KIRK BAER, Acting Director
SHIRLEY B. THATCHER, Administrative Assistant
KIM WADDELL, Project Director1
MARY JANE LETAW, Project Director2
KAREN IMHOF, Project Assistant
After October 1999
Through September 1999
The National Research Council's (NRC) Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources invited professional societies associated with agriculture and ecology to participate in a two-day workshop to explore leadership and a common vision for ecologically based pest management (EBPM). These proceedings describe the challenges of and opportunities for EBPM discussed by participants in the workshop.
The workshop was organized as a follow-up activity to the 1996 release of the NRC report Ecologically Based Pest Management: New Vision for a New Century. That study committee envisioned pest management strategies of the future based upon ecological principles and supplemented with biological, chemical, or physical inputs as necessary for safe, durable, and profitable outcomes. The study committee recognized that the shift to ecological approaches would require a substantial change from the dominant practice of product input to the primary mind-set of ecological knowledge. A foundation of ecological knowledge exists within professional societies associated with pest management, but in most cases these scientists and practitioners have diverse interests. Because a strong, unified group is necessary to build interdisciplinary, ecological systems-based approaches to pest management, the report authors encouraged professional societies to organize a forum for discussion of EBPM.
By joining together, professional societies can have a larger voice to impact the decision-making process.
Several committee members from the 1996 NRC report and leaders from a number of professional societies were solicited for their help in organizing a workshop for professional societies to explore common themes related to ecologically based pest management. Representatives from professional societies including the American Phytopathological Society, National Agricultural Biotechnology Council, Ecological Society of America, American Institute of Biological Sciences, Weed Science Society of America, Entomological Society of America, Agronomy Society of America, American Society of Animal Science, and American Agricultural Economics Association participated in the forum March 10–11, 1999, in Raleigh, North Carolina. Workshop participants included a diverse group of stakeholders: university and extension scientists, industry representatives, producers, and policy makers. The workshop was coordinated with the International Conference on Emerging Technologies for Integrated Pest Management (hosted by North Carolina State University) held March 7–10, 1999, in Raleigh, North Carolina.
The NRC workshop was designed to explore the following topics:
approaches to gain a common perspective within and across societies for ecologically based pest management;
barriers to research, development, and implementation of ecological approaches to managing pests;
interdisciplinary and inter-institutional approaches to organizing pest management research and development within a university and among research collaborators (e.g., across departments, universities, and between the public and private sectors); and
national policies to accommodate an ecological systems approach in pest management.
The two-day workshop was organized with an opening plenary session designed to communicate crosscutting themes of ecological pest management research. Eugene Odum of the University of Georgia made the keynote presentation in which he provided the audience with an overview of current agricultural practices that actually encourage pests—which provides, in part, the context and need for EBPM (Chapter 1). Ralph Hardy of the National Agricultural Biotechnology Center and Neal Van Alfen of the University of California, Davis began the session with comments describing the “vision for pest management” (Chapter 2). Miguel Altieri and Clara Ines Nichols of the University of California, Berkeley discussed the application of agroecological concepts to EBPM strategies (Chapter 3. Katherine R. Smith of the USDA's Economic Research Service shared an economist's view of EBPM (Chapter 4). Matt Liebman of Iowa State University discussed integrating soil, crop, and weed management in low-external-input farm systems (Chapter 5). Steve Lindow of the University of California, Berkeley followed with his perspective as a microbial ecologist in Chapter 6. Greg Dwyer of the University of Notre
Dame presented an overview of integrating mathematical models with field experimentation as a tool to facilitate understanding of insect-pathogen dynamics (Chapter 7). The plenary session was followed by a day of breakout sessions when participants were divided into discussion groups to promote interdisciplinary interaction and an exchange of ideas among societies and other stakeholders. These discussions were summarized in Chapter 8 from workshop transcripts and from consultations with Mary Jane Letaw and several of the other workshop organizers.
We ask the reader to remember, first, that any single workshop is necessarily incomplete and, second, that its proceedings can only report on what was said. Consequently, this report is not intended to be a thorough examination of its subject matter. All the information reported in the text emerged from the presentations made at the workshop, which were organized as a topic-by-topic synthesis of perspectives from the various fields involved with pest management. The purpose of these presentations is to highlight issues from relevant experience, identify the range of problems and challenges, and explore the opportunities that could be pursued by pest management practitioners, researchers, and professional societies. The presentations represent the views and opinions of those individuals participating in the workshop and do not necessarily represent a consensus of views or opinions, nor do they represent the deliberations of a formally constituted NRC study committee. All of the contributors have reviewed the document and affirmed that they thought the report accurately reflected the events and discussions at the workshop.
With the support of the W. K. Kellogg Foundation, the US Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service, and the National Science Foundation, the Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources convened a workshop on “Professional Societies and Ecologically Based Pest Management” in March 1999 to explore ways of developing leadership and a common vision for ecologically based pest management (EBPM) among professional societies and their collaborators. Five invited papers and a keynote presentation, reflecting the diversity of disciplines associated with pest management, are included in this report. These papers identify the challenges that face EBPM, seen from the perspective of their respective disciplines, as well as the tools and contributions that these disciplines can bring to EBPM.
The Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources wishes to recognize the following individuals for their valuable assistance in organizing the workshop and their contributions to the workshop and its proceedings:
NEAL K. VAN ALFEN, University of California, Davis
MARY BARBER, Ecological Society of America, Washington, DC
GARY W. BARRETT, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia
GERALD A. CARLSON, North Carolina State University
RALPH W. F. HARDY, National Agricultural Biotechnology Council, Clarence Center, NY
GEORGE G. KENNEDY, North Carolina State University
BRUCE D. MAXWELL, Montana State University
ALISON G. POWER, Cornell University
ROBERT G. ZIMBELMAN, Federation of Animal Science Societies, Bethesda, MD
The Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources also wishes to acknowledge Mary Jane Letaw (Project Director through September 1999) for her work in the planning and organization of the workshop. The Board also wishes to thank Karen L. Imhof, Project Assistant, for her patience and assistance throughout the project, and Editor Louise R. Goines. Special thanks are due to Kim Waddell, Project Director, for his diligence and hard work in assessing and organizing the workshop proceedings.
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: May Berenbaum, University of Illinois; Joseph Headley, University of Arkansas; Lorna Michael Butler, Iowa State University; Jenny
Broome, University of California, Davis; Max Carter, Max Carter Farm, Douglas, GA.
While the individuals listed above have provided constructive comments and suggestions, it must be emphasized that responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authors and the National Research Council.
Pest Management Decision-Making Process