RE: Switching to sustainable

Hal Hamilton (hhamilton@centerss.org)
Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:48:50 -0500

This issue of incentives for innovation is a good topic to explore. 30%
sounds high to me. There are a host of factors, however, in addition to
money. Sometimes cultural resistance to "wierd new methods" is strong
enough to counteract even highly profitable innovations. Sometimes the
inclination to be an "early adopter" leads a former chemical junkie to be
the first to adopt IPM or other "sustainable" BMPs. What's the research
say? Hal

Hal Hamilton
Center for Sustainable Systems
433 Chestnut St., Berea KY 40403 USA
Phone: (606) 986-5336; Fax: (606) 986-1299
hhamilton@centerss.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu [mailto:owner-sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu]On
> Behalf Of Bob MacGregor
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 1999 9:49 AM
> To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu
> Subject: Switching to sustainable
>
>
> A thread from a couple of weeks ago asked about how to
> promote the switch to organic. The selection below was taken
> from IPMNet News. If the same sort of net margin gain is needed
> in NA or EU for a switch to organic methods, this could be a long
> haul!
> I was surprised at the magnitude of gains necessary to induce a
> change.
> BOB
>
> ************************************************************
>
> IPM in Developing Countries: Only a Dream Without Proper Policy?
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Experiences in developing countries have shown that agricultural
> innovations meet with the desired level of acceptance once they lead
> to a rise in gross margin of around 30 percent. Increases of this mag-
> nitude in the gross margin are achieved only seldom with the introduc-
> tion of IPM.
> In the Mekong Delta of Vietnam, pesticide expenditure accounts for
> less than 5 percent of the gross margin for up to 50 percent of the
> fruit farmers, while for another 40 percent, pesticide expenditure is
> only between 5 and 20 percent of their gross margin. This is due to
> the low costs of pesticides and the relatively high gross margins.
> To introduce IPM in high value fruit crops is even more challeng-
> ing compared to rice, for instance. Unless governments support IPM
> through developing policies on limiting importation of highly toxic
> chemicals, and encouraging import and use of selective chemical pest-
> icides and biopesticides, any long-term effort to develop and gain
> acceptance of an IPM program for crops such as fruit is bound to
> fail."
> --P. Van Mele, Vietnamese-Belgian IPM in Fruit Production Project
> Cantho University, Can Tho, VIETNAM. E-mail: <paul@hcm.vnn.vn>.
> Fax: 84-71-830-814. Phone: 84-71-832-290.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> !
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
>

To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".

All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail