Definitions of IPM An integrated approach to managing urban insects and rodents

Public Health Significance of Urban Pests 551

15.1.4. Case studies and the benefits of IPM

Research by government agencies, academic institutions and the pest-control sector demonstrates that IPM is more effective than non-integrated pest-control approaches Brenner et al., 2003; Miller Meek, 2004. IPM has been effective in difficult pest-control environments, such as overcrowded urban centres with ageing and neglected buildings and infrastructure. The application and outcome of IPM in public housing developments provide important evidence of the effectiveness and benefits of an integrated approach to pest control. In many public housing developments, pesticides are applied on a regularly scheduled basis to control cockroaches. The application of pesticides is the primary – and maybe the only – control measure implemented. It is often done without monitoring the pest population. In the IPM approach, non-pesticide control measures are implemented and less pesticide is applied. Structural IPM programmes for the control of cockroaches limit their access to food and water. Measures taken to prevent such access include improvements in kit- chen sanitation, proper food storage, improvements in general housekeeping, repairs of water leaks in supply and drain lines, and emptying condensation pans. Also, the move- ment of cockroaches is controlled so that food is inaccessible. Sealing cracks and openings, screening windows, and sealing doors prevent entry and ease of movement and have pro- ven effective in reducing cockroach infestations Hedges, 1999; CDC HUD, 2006. Several studies of IPM effectiveness are summarized below.

15.1.4.1. Case study 1

A prospective intervention trial conducted in New York City by the Mount Sinai Children’s Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research Center found urban IPM programmes effective in controlling cockroaches. This project reduced cockroach activity in apartment units. Apartment dwellers received information on the control of cockroach infestations and were able to control cockroach infestations in their own units without the use of pesticides. Similar work done in Chicago included the cleaning of vacant and occupied units, and using gel and paste pesticides in place of sprays. Caulking and the installation of screening also blocked access, and improvements in sanitation included proper storage and disposal of trash. The reduced cockroach activity from this IPM programme allowed an 83 reduction in the use of gel pesticides. In the New York City project and in the work done in Chicago, the community was involved in planning, implementing and evaluating the IPM programme Brenner et al., 2003 .

15.1.4.2. Case study 2

A year-long study conducted in a Virginia public housing development found IPM to be more effective than conventional pest control practices in controlling cockroaches. In the conventionally treated units, liquid and dust pesticides were applied. In contrast, IPM-trea- ted homes were cleaned with HEPA-filtered vacuums and treated with baits and IGRs. Cockroaches were controlled in the IPM-treated units, while the cockroach populations in the apartments that received only monthly spray and dust applications did not change. Integrated pest management 550 • The plan should include a community outreach and education component. • The plan and actions should be revised as evaluation information becomes available.

15.1.3. Definitions of IPM

A number of definitions of IPM have been published. The following definition was published in 1959 Stern et al., 1959. Applied pest control which combines and integrates biological and chemical control. Chemical control is used as necessary and in a manner which is least disruptive to biological control. Integrated control may make use of naturally occurring biological control as well as biological control affected by manipulated or induced biotic agents. Since the release of this definition, more than 150 additional definitions of IPM have been proposed. A few of those definitions are provided here. A review of recent definitions shows that IPM is considered a multifactorial, long-term, systematic, and holistic or com- prehensive approach to managing pests in ways that reduce their harmful effects below acceptable levels, while avoiding or minimizing environmental hazards. FAO 1968 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 and methods in as compatible a manner as possible, and maintains the pest population at levels below those cau- sing economic injury. Still another definition Intersociety Consortium for Plant Protection, 1979 is as follows. IPM is the optimization of pest control in an economically and ecologically sound manner. This is accomplished by the use of multiple tactics in a compatible manner to maintain pest damage below the economic injury level while providing protection against hazards to humans, animals, plants, and the environment. The NPMA 2006 describes IPM as: … a process consisting of five basic steps. These include inspection, identification, the establish- ment of threshold levels, the employment of two or more control measures and the evaluation of effectiveness. To be acceptable, the control measures must be both environmentally compati- ble and economically feasible. Additional IPM definitions can be found in a compendium of definitions put together by Bajwa Kogan 1996. Public Health Significance of Urban Pests 553 • using technologies, such as trapping and monitoring, in place of pesticides; and • coordinating efforts among all facility management programmes that have a bearing on pest-control outcomes.

15.1.5. Challenges in implementing IPM programmes