IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
Topic: Ecologically Sound and Integrated Pest and Vector Management
Revised proposal prepared by the Forum Standing Committee WG on IVM & IPM
Lead sponsors Islamic Republic of Iran (N. Heidari) and PAN AP (S. Rengam)
The Forum Standing Committee is requested to
A. Consider and take a decision on the title for the plenary session.
The Working Group discussed its mandate and the scope and objective of the Forum
VI plenary session. A number of WG members are of the view that the title should be
clearer and more accurately reflect the scope and objective of the session. Those
advocating for a change put forward the following argument
"Integrated Pest and Vector Management (IPVM) is a new term used
for a new area, in which IVM is integrated into IPM Farmer Field
Schools. This approach is being piloted in Sri Lanka with technical
and operational assistance from FAO and financial assistance from
FAO, then UNEP and now WHO. This approach is still under
development. Although promising, it is still in the research stage
and has not yet provided solid results.
The terms Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Integrated Vector
Management (IVM) on the other hand refer to well-established
approaches with implementation in many countries.
As the focus of the proposed IFCS Session is IPM and IVM, it would
therefore not seem correct to use the term Integrate Pest and Vector
Management in the title. IPVM is used for a specific overlap area
between IPM and IVM, not for the sum of the two."
The WG considered a number of titles for the session but was unable to reach
agreement on the most appropriate title/subtitle to communicate the subject of the
session and adhere to the mandate of the WG. Several other members were of the
view that the WG did not have the mandate or flexibility to change the title.
Proposals:
1. Ecologically Sound and Integrated Pest Management and Integrated Vector
Management
2. Pesticide Risk Reduction and Sustainable Pest and Vector Management through
IPM and IVM
3. Ecologically-Based IPM and IVM: A key Element of Pesticide Risk Reduction
Strategies
B. Provide input on the goals, objectives and organization & content of the plenary
session
1
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
I. Background
In some countries of the WHO defined regions in particular in Africa, Asia and Latin
America, vector-borne diseases contribute to some considerable percentage of the total burden
of communicable diseases. The most important vector-borne diseases harming human health
in those regions with side-effects for environment are Malaria and Lymphatic filariasis
transmitted by mosquitoes, and Leishmaniases transmitted by sand fly. The potential for
spread of West Nile fever and yellow fever in these regions in particular in Africa is very
high.
Malaria is the most important parasitic disease in the world, with a long history of control
programs. According to the latest estimates of the WHO 300-500 million people suffer from
malaria annually in over 107 countries throughout the world and over 1 million (mostly
children under 5) lose their lives due to the disease. Ease of travel at present, occurrence of
resistance of malaria parasite to common anti malarial drugs, emergence of vector resistance
to pesticides, natural disasters, wars and global warming have led to return of malaria to some
clean areas even after many years.
The incidence of malaria is also influenced by changes in land use, deforestation and
urbanization of tropical and temperate forest lands. New transmission of this disease is
occurring as the result of enormous population movement cross borders. These imported
cases add to the burden of the local health system significantly and contribute mainly to the
local transmission of the disease. It is estimated that around 1800 billion dollars are spent
annually to control malaria worldwide. At the same time it was a surprise for the participants
of the Third Conference of the Parties to the Stockholm Convention (COP3), which was held
in Dakar, Senegal (30April-4May 2007) that they learned that DDT production and use is
again rising rapidly.
In many places, agricultural pests are a major constraint to agricultural production and food
security. Among the more common types of pests are insects, mites, rodents, viruses, fungi,
bacteria and weeds. Besides agriculture, pest problems can also occur in situations as diverse
as houses and apartments, food handling facilities, storage areas, schools and hospitals, child
care centres, road and roadside maintenance, parks, gardens, clothes and in forests.
Agricultural dependence on pesticides has steadily increased since their introduction. Each
year more than 2 million metric tons of pesticide products are used to control pests and
diseases. During the last decades pesticides have played a role in food and agricultural
production, but their uses have also caused adverse human health and environmental effects.
Regulatory control of pesticides and its enforcement remains weak in many countries.
Pesticide use affects a large number of people around the world through acute poisoning and
through chronic health effects due to long-term exposure. Current figures are not known. An
international study conducted by the WHO in 1995 estimated that approximately 3 million
cases of acute pesticide poisonings occurred annually, including 220,000 pesticide related
deaths, mainly among those who use and apply pesticides improperly. However over the last
12 years since this estimate was published pesticide use has escalated dramatically, especially
in developing countries where most of the poisonings occur, and it is probable that the current
level of poisoning is significantly higher than the 1995 figure from WHO, in which
underreporting was viewed as a significant difficulty. The most commonly recognised types
of acute pesticide poisoning result from all routes of exposures (dermal absorption, inhalation
or ingestion), especially among farmers and agricultural workers. Families of agriculture
workers and the surrounding communities have also been identified as populations at risk. In
addition, there is a range of chronic effects that in most cases are not well recognized and
difficult to link to particular substances.
2
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
In humans, pesticides affect the nervous, immune, reproductive, cardiovascular and endocrine
systems, and may cause cancer. Recent research indicate that some pesticides disrupt the
body's endocrine system – the sex glands, hormones and target cells that help control growth,
development, reproduction and behavior. Children, in particular, are more susceptible to
pesticides for various reasons: they are still developing, have faster metabolisms, can be
involved in play activities that increase their exposure, and have different food patterns that
can lead to much higher intake per unit of body weight.
Pesticides also have significant impacts on wildlife and the environment. They have been
detected in a large number of countries in water bodies, including those that provide drinking
water, and in the marine environment. For some pesticides, residues are also detected in rain
and snow, and in vegetation far from where they have been used. The full impact on the
environment can only be understood with detailed studies of the ecosystem and of the damage
caused by indiscriminate use of pesticides.
In order to reduce the adverse effects of pesticides on human health and ecosystems, and to
maintain their effectiveness in agriculture, new approaches to managing pests were
developed. These new approaches relied less on pesticides and more on a set of integrated
measures that reduce pest pressure. Instead of simply trying to eradicate a pest by using
pesticides, an integrated pest management approach aims to keep pest populations in check
“through the careful consideration of all available pest control techniques and subsequent
integration of appropriate measures that discourage the development of pest populations and
keep pesticides and other interventions to levels that are economically justified and reduce or
minimize risks to human health and the environment. IPM emphasizes the growth of a
healthy crop with the least disruption to agro-ecosystems and encourages natural pest control
mechanisms”. (FAO definition of Integrated Pest Management (IPM)).
IPM programmes in Asia that developed with support of the UN Food and Agriculture
Organisation have provided an important example. In the 1980s, Asia’s rice production was
threatened by the brown plant hopper (BPH) and Indonesia requested the FAO to help solve
the problem. FAO’s response was based on the ecological finding (since the 1970s) that the
indiscriminate use of pesticides was causing the BPH to become a serious threat to rice.
Indonesia’s Presidential Decree in 1986 announced the implementation of a national IPM
programme in Indonesia and the ban of 57 formulations of pesticides. This national IPM
programme began an innovative training programme that entailed a season long experiential
learning by farmers to understand the ecology of the rice fields. These Farmer Field Schools
(FFS) included experiments, field observations, and group analysis. The knowledge gained
from the FFS enabled farmers to make their own locally specific decisions about crop
management practices. This approach was radically different from earlier IPM extension
programmes in which farmers were given instructions from specialists from outside the
community. The success of the FFS in Indonesia – no major BPH outbreaks in over 20 years
and over 35% reduction in rice insecticide use with growing rice production - led to the rapid
spread of the FFS approach for rice IPM to other countries, and was followed by a spread to
other crops. The FFS approach has proven useful not only to ensure the spread of IPM in
Asia and globally, but also to enable farmers to better participate, dialogue and make joint
decisions to deal with issues and problems.
Specific IPM techniques include crop rotation, biological controls, resistant varieties of
plants, pheromones to attract beneficial insects, efficiently targeted spraying, and other
methods. IPM reduces the adverse impact on the environment and human health from the use
of pesticides and generally helps reduce production costs because less needs to be spend on
costly chemicals. In addition, there are clear economic benefits to the public in the form of
reduced costs to human health and the environment.
3
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
Control of vector borne diseases is a complex and multifaceted problem. Most disease
management has focused on control of vectors and at the root of vector control in countries
with endemic vector borne diseases is inadequate environmental sanitation, and poor personal
hygiene. However, in various countries in Africa most activities to control malaria and other
vector borne diseases are focused on the use of residual insecticide. This is also complicated
by the fact that controversy still exists over the adverse health and environmental effects of
persistent organic pollutants found in these insecticides. Even though an integrated multisectorial approach to the management of vector borne diseases which include development
programmes, such as irrigated agriculture, hydroelectric dam construction, road building,
forest clearance, housing development and industrial expansion, could be successful at
controlling vectors, opportunities for cooperation and for adoption of strategies other
than those based on insecticides are seldom grasped.
An example of a relevant national programme is the "Make Zambia Clean and Healthy"
launched in June 2007 by the national government. The programme aims to make cities,
towns and villages healthier places to live. For some years now communities have
experienced constant outbreaks of communicable diseases, such as malaria and cholera. This
is mainly due to a lack of safe water supply, inadequate environmental sanitation,
inappropriate personal hygiene and eating habits combined with low levels of knowledge of
basic environmental health and hygiene matters. The "Make Zambia Clean and Healthy"
programme is a government led, multi disciplinary, multi sectoral, environmental campaign
programme in which government authorities at all levels work together with public sector
institutes, church organizations, and individuals to carry out a wide range of activities. The
work promotes personal hygiene, garbage collection, provision of clean and safe water and
sanitation, and general cleanliness of the living environment and communities.
IVM is a rational decision-making process for the optimal use of resources for vector control
(WHO definition, December 2007). The attributes of IVM are described in the WHO
publication: Global Strategic Framework for Integrated Vector Management (2004)1:
"Integrated vector management is a process for managing vector populations in
such a way as to reduce or interrupt transmission of disease. Characteristic
features of IVM include:
• methods based on knowledge of factors influencing local vector biology,
disease transmission and morbidity;
• use of a range of interventions, often in combination and synergistically;
• collaboration within the health sector and with other public and private
sectors that impact on vectors;
• engagement with local communities and other stakeholders;
• a public health regulatory and legislative framework.
An IVM-based process should be cost-effective, should have indicators for
monitoring efficacy with respect to impact on vector populations and disease
transmission, and should employ sustainable approaches compatible with local
health systems. It should also allow effective planning and decision-making to
take place at the lowest possible administrative levels (subsidiarity).
…...
1
Global Strategic Framework for Integrated Vector Management (2004;
WHO/CDS/CPE/PVC/2004.10) - section 3.
(http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2004/WHO_CDS_CPE_PVC_2004_10.pdf )
4
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
An additional and key impetus to the adoption of IVM arises out of the need to
ensure the sound management and judicious use of insecticides, as requested
by the World Health Assembly and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants. This has led to a reappraisal of the strategy for vector
control and a commitment to the development of effective measures that reduce
risk and are compatible with protection of the environment and sustainable
development. Such a commitment requires an approach that effectively
integrates the roles of the various sectors, including health, within a strategic
management framework.
An IVM approach takes into account the available health infrastructure and
resources and integrates all available and effective measures, whether
chemical, biological or environmental. IVM also encourages effective
coordination of the control activities of all sectors that have an impact on
vector borne diseases, including health, water, solid waste and sewage disposal,
housing and agriculture. Commensurate benefits for non-health-sector partners
make it more likely that IVM approaches will be effective. …..
…..
While IVM emphasizes effective systems and action at the local level, the
support of nationwide programmes is essential for major diseases such as
malaria, dengue and filariasis. These programmes will be required to provide
technical advice on vector-borne disease epidemiology, surveillance and
control technologies, and to provide adequate systems for programme
monitoring and quality control. However, successful vector control
programmes need more than just expertise in vector control technologies —
they also need expertise in planning and programme management. The
requisite skills remain scarce, particularly in the resource-poor countries that
are most in need of effective vector-borne disease control. A massive effort
will be required to build the capacity to address these various facets of IVM."
Another reason for promoting IPM and IVM is the need to reduce the pressure of
development of insecticide resistance to ensure that pesticide are effective when absolutely
required, it is particular important to maintain the effectiveness of pesticides with low
hazards.
Therefore, policies and strategies are needed to promote Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
and Integrated Vector Management (IPV) at global, regional and national levels. Importantly,
it should be recognized that policies to promote IPM and IVM are consistent with and
supportive of the Millennium Development Goals of poverty reduction, combating malaria
and other diseases as well as ensuring environmental sustainability. Governments and
international bodies that fund development projects should accept and follow the principles
inherent in IPM and IVM.
II. Goals and objectives of the discussion of this topic
The overall goal is to reduce adverse environmental and human health effects resulting from
the use of pesticides in pest and disease vector management through the adoption and
implementation of IPM and IVM.
5
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
To achieve this overarching goal, there is a need for global support to strengthen IPM and
IVM through policy reform, capacity building, and education. There is a need for countries
and regions around the world to take the necessary legislative and/or administrative measures
to achieve pesticide risk reduction through reduced use of chemical insecticides and selection
of less hazardous products when use of pesticides is deemed justified. Replacement of
pesticides by environmentally and ecologically friendly measures such as biological control
and environment management, are an important element of strategies to reduce reliance on
pesticides.
IFCS, as an open, transparent and inclusive forum for discussing issues of common interest
and also new and emerging issues in the area of sound management of chemicals should play
its role. The purpose of this session would be to emphasize pesticide use reduction as the first
step in pesticide risk reduction, and to encourage Governments, intergovernmental
organizations, non-governmental organizations and the private sector to strengthen the role of
IPM and IVM in pesticide risk reduction strategies.
Baseline surveys and detailed situation analysis including epidemiological, entomological and
ecological assessment should be conducted in selected areas around the world to determine
the current status of, and further potential for, IPM and IVM implementation.
Any effort of the IFCS should not be duplication, but a distinct and added contribution to the
global efforts to mainstream IPM and IVM to help eradicate such easily communicable
diseases and manage pests in a sustainable manner. The plenary session at Forum VI supports
the implementation of SAICM Global Plan of Action2 activities 29, 50 and 159 which are
extensions of the IFCS Priority for Action beyond 2000 (D1)3 and Forum IV
recommendations on acutely toxic pesticides.4
Furthermore, this topic is cross-cutting with other issues IFCS has focused on, including
poverty, the widening gap, illegal traffic, and children and chemical safety.
Therefore the overall objectives of the session could be as inter-alia:
provide information on achievements of existing IPM and IVM programmes.
identify opportunities and challenges for broader application of IPM and IVM.
consider policy and institutional impediments and how these could be addressed.
consider ways and means to strengthen inter-sectoral collaboration and regional and
international cooperation.
sharing information on the IPM work of FAO and IVM work of WHO
WHO, FAO, GEF and Stockholm Convention on POPs contribution as well as
government agencies, industry and CSOs to implementing best practices in IPM and
IVM.
III. General topics for papers and plenary
-
-
Overview on existing programmes to promote IVM and IPM including:
1. Best practices
2. Roles of different sectors
Identifying and addressing institutional and policy impediments
Knowledge management and gaps in knowledge
Emerging issues and challenges
Ways and means to broaden use of Integrated Vector Management (IVM)
Ways and means to broaden use of Integrated Pest Management ( IPM)
2
http://www.chem.unep.ch/saicm/SAICM%20texts/SAICM%20documents.htm
http://www.who.int/ifcs/documents/forums/forum3/en/index.html
4
http://www.who.int/ifcs/documents/forums/forum4/final_report/en/index.html
3
6
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
-
New developments: initial findings of a pilot project to combine IVM with IPM in a
community based approach (Sri Lanka experience)
Capacity challenges for implementation at different levels (eg. government, farmers,
industry)
Implementation of IVM and IPM will face issues, challenges and opportunities that vary
between countries in different stages of development (developed countries, developing
countries and countries in transition). Each of the presenters will be asked to address these
differences that need to be taken into account.
IV. Issues that could be considered by the IFCS
There is strong and broad evidence that IPM and IVM offer valid alternatives that help reduce
pesticide use in pest management and vector control. Pesticide use reduction is considered
the first step in pesticide risk reduction.
The main issue to be considered is how IFCS can support a concerted approach, with
involvement of all relevant sectors, to promote institutionalizing and mainstreaming of IPM
and IVM approaches in programme and policy development. Not only in programmes and
polices directly related to pest management or disease control, but also in broader policies
related to chemicals management, environmental health, food safety, sustainable agricultural
and rural development, Millennium Development Goals, etc.
Levels of interaction should include:
- awareness raising
- capacity building
- policy reform
Key elements include:
- farmer participation and empowerment
- providing broad access to non-chemical alternatives
More specific elements for preparation of an action plan include:
-
Problem analysis, needs assessment and priority setting on cross-border
collaboration on pest and vector control;
-
Capacity building for field-evidence-based decision taking on pest or vector
management interventions;
-
Public awareness on health and environmental aspects of pest and vector control
policies and operations to facilitate high community participation in IPM and IVM;.
-
Provide guidance on applied research on IPM and IVM;
-
Provide guidance on monitoring and evaluation of IPM and IVM measures through
countries, regional and global capacity building, training and technology transfer;
-
Provide guidance on financial and other resources needed for IPM and IVM;
-
Guidance on how to contribute to the reduction of the risks to the human health and
environment through management of pest and vector born diseases transmission in a
7
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
sustainable, cost effective and environmentally friendly manner;
-
V.
Support implementation of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and
Use of Pesticides, with special attention to paragraphs related to IPM and IVM
Possible Forum Actions
The Forum may wish to consider and agree on actions and recommendations to enable
progress in implementing IPM and IVM. These recommendations and action would be
prepared by an ad hoc working group established during Forum VI. The agreed actions and
recommendations would be brought forward to other international bodies addressing the
sound management of chemicals, in particular the second session in 2009 of the International
Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM2) overseeing the implementation of the
strategic approach to international chemicals management (SAICM).
VI. Plenary session structure (format, presentations, time)
Length of session: 180 minutes
Organization of session: introduction/general principles followed by seven or eight (7 or 8)
presentations of 15 minutes each, with 45 minutes for plenary discussion.
Each presenter will be asked to submit an abstract (1 page) highlighting the key items in
his/her presentation. The abstracts will be compiled and made available as a room paper
together with the official Forum VI meeting documents.
Proposed plenary programme
1. Presentation of general principles of IVM and IPM (which are similar)
2. State of implementation of IVM and further potential (4 presentations: WHO and case
studies by government, industry or NGO/CSO)
3. State of implementation of IPM and further potential ( 4 presentations: FAO and case
studies by government, industry or NGO/CSO)
Presentations will include information on the following issues
 Areas of intervention: awareness raising, capacity building, policy reform
 Current challenges with implementing IVM and IPM (presentation of examples in
different country contexts identifying problem areas)
 Identifying possibilities for regional or cross border capacity building in order to
promote IVM and IPM.
Presentations proposed/under consideration (not in any priority order):
NOTE: Names have been penciled in by the organizers. Persons involved still need to
be contacted.

Presentation of general principles of IVM and IPM
Joint WHO/FAO, for instance Robert Bos and Peter Kenmore
8
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
State of implementation of IPM and further potential (4 presentations planned)

FAO (2 presentations)
o
o

IPM Farmer Field Schools (FFS) – William Settle, FAO
Pest and pest management: policy development trends - Harry van der Wulp,
FAO
Experience in IPM implementation
o
The FAO IPM Programme for West Africa, with special emphasis on the
work in Senegal. Hama Garba, Regional Coordinator.
o
(If time permits) The FAO IPM Programme for Asia (National coordinator
from Cambodia or Vietnam)
o
ICIPE - The African Insect Science for Food and Health
Shililu Josphat, ICIPE, Kenya
o
IPM and Farmers Empowerment by Shisuk, Bangladesh or Gita Pertiwi in
Indonesia (NGOs/CSOs)
o
IPM and organic farming: What can modern organic approaches and
traditional knowledge contribute to both IPM and IVPM by International
Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) or national IFOAM
or national groups working on organic agriculture.
o
IPM by the food industry: The role of IPM in Good Agricultural Practice.
(FAO could prepare a shortlist of potential speakers)
o
State of implementation of IVM and further potential (4 presentations planned)

WHO – IVM (Presentation related to the new WHO Guidelines on IVM)

“A framework for decision making in integrated vector management to prevent
disease” – by Henk van den Berg and Willem Takken

IVM in the urban context - VP Sharma, India (former director Malaria Research
Centre)

IVM in coastal areas, forest fringe and forests - Steve Lindsay, Durham University
Other

Monitoring and Evaluation – an essential part of the work
(Note: FAO has done considerable work on methodology development for IPM
impact assessment)
Suggested speaker: Hossein Ladonni (Ph.D), Professor of Medical Entomology&
Vector Control Dept., School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical
Sciences, Tehran (see annex for general information on proposed presentation)

Integrated Pest and Vector Management (IPVM), a new concept
o Sri Lanka pilot project that combined IPM and IVM to reduce both
agricultural pests and disease vectors. Hector Senerath, Sri Lanka, and Henk
van den Berg.
9
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
EXCURSION (OPTIONAL) to IPM Farmer field schools near Dakar. (Subject to the FAO
IPM Programme being willing and able to help organise such an excursion. Harry van der
Wulp will explore this.)
VI. Process for preparing – how the plenary session document (thought starter) and
plenary programme will be prepared on IVM and IPM
11 December 2007:
revised proposal for Forum VI session on IVM and IPM considered by Forum
Standing Committee (FSC);
12 December 2007 – 3 February 2008:
WG finalize

Forum VI meeting paper

Forum VI plenary programme and presentations
Specific work process and schedule being prepared by Co.chairs.
3 February:
Final draft of Forum VI thought starter paper and proposed plenary programme
(presentation topics and speakers) submitted to IFCS secretariat.
26-28 February 2008
FSC reviews and provides input on final draft of Forum VI thought starter paper and
plenary programme.
March 2008 - 1 April 2008
WG revises and finalizes as necessary based on FSC input Forum VI thought starter
paper.
March 2008 - August 2008
WG finalizes plenary programme and its organization
10
IFCS/FSC/07.21 rev 3
3 December 2007
Annex
Proposed presentation:
IVM Monitoring and Evaluation – an essential part of the work
Hossein Ladonni (Ph.D), Professor of Medical Entomology& Vector Control Dept., School of Public
Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
1. Monitoring
• Monitoring is a continuous process design to verify step by step the progress of vector control
operation.
• To verify whether activities have been implemented as planed, insure accountability.
•
To detect any problem and/or constraints in order to provide local feedback to the relevant
authorities and to support them for promoting better planning through careful selection of
alternative of future action.
• It requires the identification of appropriate process indicators- the operational indicators that
assigned to the activities perfumed and targets.
2. Evaluation
• Evaluation is used to define the periodic assessment of progress towards the achievement of
the objective by measuring impact indicators and the goals of the programme by measuring
outcome indicators.
• The impact indicators are the entomological measurements.
• The outcome indicators are the health outcomes or epidemiological indicators.
Three kinds of indicators are used in monitoring and evaluation:
• Process (or operational)
• Impact (or entomological)
• Outcome (or epidemiological)
Indicators may be classified in other ways:
Routine monitoring (R), Trends (T) and Selectivity for specific purposes (S)
3. Resistance
• An operational plan for monitoring, evaluation and management of vector control.
• Monitoring
• Indicators for monitoring and evaluation
• Development of Resistance
• Definition and classification of resistance
• Methods of detection of resistance
• The Aims of monitoring resistance
•
Management of resistance
• Resistance management tactics
• Practical approaches of resistance management in vector control programmes
4. Resistance Management
• Resistance management is a technique for slowing
• Preventing
• Reversing and delay in development of resistance in pests
• Promoting it in beneficial natural enemies
5. Resistance management tactics
• Treat the most vulnerable life stage.
• Mix pesticides of different modes of action and metabolism.
• Decrease the concentration of insecticide
• Apply insecticide less frequently
• Use chemicals with only short residual activity
• Allow refuges for escape of susceptibles
• Treating only those parts of a field that have malaria transmission
• Rotate pesticides
• Mosaics
11