IPM research and development began in Pakistan in 1971 through projects on cotton pests funded by the Asian Development Bank. Since then, biological control methods have been developed for several major crops using natural enemies and selective pesticides. In 2000, Pakistan launched its National IPM Programme to institutionalize IPM and reduce pesticide misuse through coordination between research institutions, extension services, and other stakeholders. The program aims to promote IPM techniques tailored to local conditions, including cultural practices, resistant varieties, biocontrol, and judicious use of pesticides.

1. Status of IPM in Pakistan A Report By Allah Dad Khan An Expert IN
IPM At National And International Level
In Pakistan, research and development on IPM was initiated in 1971 by
PARC-IIBC station, Rawalpindi (now CABI Bioscience Regional Centre-
Pakistan). A seven-year project on cotton bollworms, a three-year project
on cotton whitefly, and an institutional three-year support project on IPM,
funded by Asian Development Bank, were the first IPM projects. Similarly,
other IPM activities like introduction of natural enemies of
sugarcane Pyrilla in Sindh and NWFP, cultural control of Gurdaspur borer
in sugarcane, pheromones (methyl eugenol) to control fruit fly and effective
& environment friendly use of pesticides against cotton pests, were
successfully carried out on large scale by various
researchers. Coccinallids sp was used to control mango hopper and apple
scales. Biological control based IPM technologies for cotton, sugarcane,
maize, fruits and vegetables have also been developed recently. A project
on “Cotton IPM Implementation through Training of Trainers (TOT) and
Farmers Field Schools (FFS) was also undertaken in Punjab by CABI
Bioscience Centre (Poswal& Williamson1998). At present the centre is
running IPM projects on fruits and vegetables in Balochistan and NWFP
provinces.
A number of plant protection related institutes in the National Agricultural
Research System (NARS) are involved in developing IPM technologies for
major crops. IPM technology comprising of cultural practices, resistant
varieties, use of bio-control agents and selective use of pesticides has
been developed for managing rice pests in Pakistan. The technology is
being disseminated on farmers’ fields and pesticide application has
considerably been reduced in IPM fields.
Many progressive farmers and Sugar Industries are successfully rearing
and augmenting Trichogramma sp.and Chrysoperla sp. to control pests of
cotton and sugarcane. Chrysoperla sp. has played an important role in the
control of whitefly during the last two cotton seasons in the Punjab where
chemical control measures had failed. Control of Helicoverpa sp. has been

2. demonstrated on small scale with Trichogramma sp. on chickpea,
sunflower and cotton. Pesticides of plant origin like “Triaimol”,“Nimboli” and
“Nimbokil” have been locally developed and are being used to control
important pests.
National IPM Programme
Although, work on research and development, and IPM practice was
initiated a long time ago in Pakistan and has gained momentum in the last
decade through both national and international cooperation projects, IPM
was not institutionalized as in other countries. It needed to be placed as a
coherent programme including all components at the federal and provincial
level. There is awareness and commitment at the highest level in the
Government to rationalize the use of pesticides and to adopt the alternative
approaches and strategies based on IPM rationale. To achieve this, it was
necessary to translate the Governments strategy into action plan whereby
the IPM moves from project approach to a viable and sustainable national
programme.
IPM was identified as a key element of sustainable agricultural
development in the Policy and Strategy for Agriculture developed by
Government of Pakistan as part of its response to increasing
misuse/overuse of pesticides and their negative impacts on the society in
the Country. A consultative process among potential stakeholders was
begun, which culminated in the launching of the National Integrated Pest
Management Programme (Nat-IPM) in December 2000.
The National IPM Programme (Nat-IPM) is led by the National Focal Point
for IPM as the overall Coordinator and assisted by five component
coordinators, one each for policy analysis, education, information
dissemination & public awareness, research & development and field
implementation. The Nat-IPM works under the guidance of IPM Inter-
Ministerial Advisory Committee (IPM-IMC) and is technically supported by
the National Expert Committee (NIPMEC). It keeps close liaison with
NIPMEC members, relevant federal and provincial research and extension

3. departments,committees and IPM units. It encourages interaction between
various institutions.
The overall goals of the Programme are established in the light of the policy
statement given in the policy and strategy document, “Agricultural
Strategies for the First Decade of New Millennium” issued in June 2000.
The agreed IPM programme is being implemented by partner organizations
and coordinated by Nat-IPM. The Programme operates from National
Agricultural Research Centre Islamabad under the auspices of Pakistan
Agricultural Research Council – an apex body of the Ministry of Food,
Agriculture and Livestock. Various federal and provincial public sector
research and development organizations, NGOs and international
organizations are participating actively in the Nat-IPM activities. The
National IPM Programme has following vision and objectives:
IPM is a common-sense method that builds on practices that farmers have used for
centuries, for example, using varieties resistant to pests, altering time of sowing
and harvest, hoeing, removing crop residues and using botanical pesticides
(egneem and tobacco extracts). The name, IPM, goes back at least to the 1960s. In
1967, FAO defined IPM as 'a pest management system that, in the context of the
associated environment and the population dynamics of the pest species, utilizes all
suitable techniques in as compatible a manner as possible and maintains the pest
population at levels below those causing economic injury'. It seeks to reduce pest
populations to economically manageable levels through a combination of cultural
control (eg crop rotation, inter-cropping), physical controls (hand picking of pests,
use of pheromones to trap pests), and less toxic chemical controls. However, it
allows the use of chemical pesticides, even synthetic and toxic ones, when there is
a need. IPM techniques are specific to the agro-ecologicalproduction conditions in
any given location, and may involve the use of pesticides. As a result, few general
principles can be applied and no absolute standards set for production.
In Pakistan, research on IPM has a fairly long history. This was initiated as early as
1971 at the PARC research station in Rawalpindi, first as a seven year PL-480
funded project on bollworms, and a 3-year PL-480 project on the whitefly, and an
institutional support project on integrated pest management, funded by the Asian
Development Bank.
However, these projects have not had a serious impact on production methods. A
major reason is the limited nature of the project, without efforts to mainstream it in
the functioning of the major research institutions, especially the system of cotton
research institutes. Second, the extension system is not equipped to handle results
from the IPM research, since there are hardly any avenues for training of extension
staff in this technology. Finally, the educational institutions (especially the

4. entomology departments of agriculture universities) do not provide training or
specialization in IPM, to ensure a steady stream of experts for staffing research,
education, and extension departments.
Today, the number of institutions that influence agricultural allocation decisions
runs into scores if not hundreds. To list only the most prominent of these, the
Pakistan Central Cotton Committee (PCCC), the system of Cotton Research
Institutes (CRIs), the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council system, the Textile
Commissioner, the Agricultural Prices Commission, the Federal Seed Certification
Department (FCSD), various agricultural universities, and the Export Promotion
Bureau (EPB). The country has 4,000 agricultural scientists, 500 agricultural
extension agents, and proportional numbers of officials in seed certification and
supply, agricultural machinery provision, policy development and agricultural
pricing, and agricultural credit, all in the public sector.