Henry Wainwright, The Real IPM Company (K) Ltd
The crop protection industry is dominated by the large multinational agro-chemical companies such as Syngenta, Monsanto and Bayer Cropscience. The biocontrol business is minute in comparison, with only 3% of global sales of crop protection products. The future of the biocontrol industry is based on a range of interacting factors and difficult to predict the future, however many are suggesting that its future is likely to grow. There are numerous drivers for the use of biological control.
Pesticide resistance.
Whether a pest or a disease, most organisms have the ability to become resistant to a large range of pesticides. This is often seen in the field where one season a particular pesticide works well and later the efficacy is not there. Resistance has been reported in many common groups of insecticides and fungicides. There occurrence of resistance to a biological control is virtually unknown. For instance in Kenya the wide spread adoption of the use of predatory mites was mainly due the fact that many of the conventional pesticides were not working due to resistance.
Governments and the regulators.
Broadly around the global, the authorities are trying to reduce the reliance on conventional pesticides. For instance France launched their Ecophyto action plan which has the objective to reduce pesticides, in compliance with the EU’s Sustainable Use Directive. The aim is to reduce the dependency of farms on plant protection products (up to 50% reduction in ten years), while at the same time maintaining agricultural production at a high level in both quality and quantity terms. Another and more dramactic example of how governments can affect the use of pesticides is that the EU has placed severe restrictions on the use of neonicotinoid insecticides in 2013 in the EU. As a consequence Syngenta has submitted a legal challenge to the European Commission’s decision to suspend the use of thiamethoxam (Actara, Cruiser) on bee attractive crops. According to Syngenta, the Commission took the decision on the basis of a flawed process, an inaccurate and incomplete assessment by the European Food Safety Authority and without the full support of EU Member States. Whatever the outcome, the neonicotinoid group of pesticides which include imidacloprid (Confidor), thiaclorpid (Calypso), acetamiprid (Golan) and thiamethoxam (Actara) are likely to be under pressure for years to come and this will not only be reflected in the EU but also Kenya as well. For instance the UK supermarket has given notice to its suppliers world-wide that they do not want neonicotinids used on their crops after the end of 2014. Therefore can biological control fill the vacuum left by the regulators withdrawing pesticides?
Retailer pressure.
The European retailers are under pressure to reduce the use of pesticides in the products they sell, whether this is French beans or roses. This is for instance an important criteria in products labelled Fair Trade. As a consequence they exert market forces on the growers in Kenya to comply by measuring pesticide use (MPS scheme) and determining the pesticide residues on products. Therefore growers are forced to seek alternative methods of pest and disease control and this will include the greater use of biological control agents.
Availability and cost.
Technology, such as biological control will only be adopted if it is available, at a price that can be afforded and is shown to be effective. Kenya has been fortunate to have biological control agents that are produced in Kenya that are certainly available, fresh, and low cost. In addition to locally produced BCAs, the large Kenya flower market has attracted BCA suppliers from Europe, South Africa, India and China hoping to supply this large market. Therefore the Kenyan grower clearly will have a good choice of product available in the future. Cost is an important factor because if the price is too high, growers will not be able to use enough of the BCA and therefore they will not always work quickly enough. Where cost is high then some growers can justify the extra cost through extra yield and quality.
Flower quality.
Stressed plants do not yield as much as un-stressed plants. Therefore growers spend much of their time optimising plant growth and relieving plant stress. Pests cause plants stress, pesticides reduce the pest but at the sametime can stress the plant. Wetters and adjuvants can cause stress by removing the waxy layer of leaves and in turn plants can be stressed. A feature of using biological control agents is that they do not stress the plant and in turn the stress free plants responds but producing more yield, increasing bud and stem length. However the grower has to capitalise and earn more money from this benefit.The Changing “mindset” of Kenya growers. Farmers are not famous for their adoption of new ideas and as a group they can be considered conservative. My parents did it this way and it worked so why change! However a feature of the Kenya floriculture sector is that it has been a rapid adopter of change. New ideas and technologies are welcome and growers are always willing to try something new and this is all about mindset. Within any group there are the early adopters and the laggards, but in general adoption is not a major barrier. This is not the case with groups of growers in other sectors and parts of the world. There are many reasons for this but the consequence is that this leads to technologies that are shown to be successful quickly being adopted. As a result biological control in some form or another has been adopted by the floriculture sector. This flexible mindset of the Kenyan grower is likely to be a key factor in the future success of the Kenyan industry and biological control.
The future of biological control.
The pointers suggest that the biological control might be a greater force in the crop protection industry in future. Pesticide makers such as Switzerland’s Syngenta as well as Bayer AG and BASF SE of Germany are seeking environmentally friendly technology as the European Union phases out hundreds of agrochemical products and supermarkets require fewer chemical residues on foods. Syngenta has said it could lose $75 million in sales from a two-year EU ban on its Thiamethoxam chemical amid concerns to bee health. The EU ban will take effect Dec. 1.Therefore you would expect the multinationals to be getting more involved in biological control. This is exactly what has happened in the last year with Bayer buying Agraquest,a global supplier of innovative biological pest management solutions based on natural microorganisms. BASF purchased Becker Underwood, a major biological seed treatments producer, whilst Syngenta purchased Pasteuria Bioscience which produces a range of soil.
Though there are many positives for the future of biological control there are some challenges to using the technology. Particularly with the use of predatory mites their successful use requires greater management and better scouting. With the precision scouting systems offered by Scarab-Consulting, again using some of the latest technology this challenge is being solved. BCAs are slow to act therefore planning and anticipation are critical. There is no knock down with biological control and fire fighting with BCAs is not an option! To make biopesticides work they need a prophylactic programme which involves regularly application and results can take as long as 6 months to full be appreciated. Fortunately most floriculture crops are longer term perennial crops which are highly suited to prophylactic programmes. The introduction of biological control brings with it new challenges, such as pests that were of minor importance ten years ago e.g. mealy bug. However these are often temporary challenges and solutions are soon found such as either compatible chemicals or another biological control.
There are many factors that cause a grower to follow a particular growing practice. With increasing price costs and unpredictable prices for roses, returns and profit are a major factor. The adoption of new technology must always be examined from a financial basis and need for efficient, accurate financial monitoring at the greenhouse and variety level is critical. Many flowers growers have been adopting BCAs and seem to think they are cost effective method of crop protection. In future the speed of change is unlikely to slow, the biological control industry has to keep up the pace of innovation to address the next new crop protection challenge!
MR. Henry Wainwright is a senior BCAs consultant and Managing Director of Real IPM K Ltd specialising in Consultancy and development of Bio-controls in Kenya