Smart Solutions for Safer Farming
Integrated Management of Insects, Diseases, and Weeds (IPM) is an agricultural practice designed to address the challenges posed by pests, diseases, and weeds in common bean cultivation. It provides a holistic approach to crop protection while prioritizing environmental sustainability and food safety. IPM focuses on maintaining a well-balanced ecosystem of beneficial organisms and employs a diverse set of biological, mechanical, physical, and cultural methods to achieve effective and long-lasting protection against pests and diseases. This technology aims to reduce the reliance on chemical pesticides, promoting natural control mechanisms, and ensuring crop productivity and food security. IPM can be adapted to various soil types and climatic conditions, making it a versatile and environmentally responsible solution for common bean growers.
This technology is TAAT1 validated.
Adults 18 and over: Positive high
IPM promotes safer farming practices by emphasizing non-chemical pest control methods, reducing the potential health risks associated with pesticide exposure for adults involved in agriculture
The poor: Positive medium
IPM provide long-term cost savings by reducing dependence on expensive chemical pesticides.
Under 18: Positive medium
By reducing pesticide reliance, IPM protects the long-term health of children and minimizes risks associated with chemical exposure during development.
Women: Positive medium
This supports family well-being and potentially enhances women’s roles in sustainable agricultural practices.
Climate adaptability: Highly adaptable
By promoting practices like crop diversification and the use of pest-resistant varieties, IPM supports crops in adapting to climate variability.
Farmer climate change readiness: Significant improvement
By promoting resilient, sustainable practices like pest-resistant crops, natural pest control, improved soil health, and reduced chemical dependency.
Biodiversity: Positive impact on biodiversity
IPM practices help maintain and even enhance biodiversity by preserving beneficial organisms such as pollinators, natural predators, and soil microbes.
Carbon footprint: Much less carbon released
IPM reduces the reliance on chemical pesticides, leading to less contamination of soil, water, and air.
Environmental health: Greatly improves environmental health
By reducing the use of pesticides and herbicides, IPM prevents chemical residues from accumulating and harming local flora and fauna.
Soil quality: Improves soil health and fertility
This approach encourages practices that reduce erosion and maintain soil organic matter, leading to healthier soils with enhanced nutrient availability, water retention, and resilience against drought and flooding.
Crop losses: Pest, disease, and weed pressure can undermine interventions designed to improve common bean productivity and farmer livelihoods.
High pest management costs: Repeated chemical applications can increase production costs and reduce the economic benefits of agricultural programmes.
Health and environmental risks: Inappropriate pesticide use can expose farmers and communities to hazardous chemicals and affect ecosystem health.
Growing resistance risks: Overreliance on chemical pesticides can reduce the effectiveness of crop protection measures over time.
Limited understanding of ecological control: Farmers may lack training in pest monitoring, beneficial organisms, and integrated decision-making.
Uncertain programme outcomes: Ineffective crop protection can lead to variable yields, lower farmer income, and reduced sustainability of bean production interventions.
Support integrated crop protection programmes: Development partners can support the adaptation of IPM packages to local common bean production systems and their main pest, disease, and weed challenges.
Build farmer and extension capacity: Training can cover pest identification, field scouting, economic thresholds, beneficial organisms, safe pesticide use, and integrated decision-making.
Establish demonstration plots: Farmer field demonstrations and learning networks can show how integrated approaches are applied under local conditions.
Promote appropriate control combinations: Technical support can help farmers combine resistant varieties where available, seed treatment, biological control, field sanitation, mechanical weed management, and targeted pesticide applications.
Monitor costs and production outcomes: Programmes can track pesticide use, crop damage, yields, production costs, and farmer adoption to assess performance.
Strengthen environmental and social outcomes: Monitoring biodiversity, pesticide exposure practices, and participation by women and young farmers can help programmes assess the broader benefits and limitations of IPM.
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) combines biological, cultural, mechanical, and targeted chemical control methods to reduce crop losses from pests, diseases, and weeds while minimizing dependence on synthetic pesticides. By promoting ecological balance, protecting beneficial organisms, and encouraging evidence-based pest management decisions, the technology improves food safety, environmental health, biodiversity conservation, and sustainable crop production. It is well suited for common bean value chain development, food safety, sustainable intensification, and climate-smart agriculture programmes, contributing to SDGs 2 (Zero Hunger), 3 (Good Health and Well-being), 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), 13 (Climate Action), and 15 (Life on Land). The technology creates opportunities for women, youth, extension agents, and crop protection service providers through safer and more sustainable pest management practices. To successfully integrate this technology, consider the following key actions:
Operation cost per year
Coating 1kg of seed
Pre-emergence herbicides
Open source / open access
Scaling Readiness describes how complete a technology's development is and its ability to be scaled. It produces a score that measures a technology's readiness along two axes: the level of maturity of the idea itself, and the level to which the technology has been used so far.
Each axis goes from 0 to 9 where 9 is the “ready-to-scale” status. For each technology profile in the e-catalogs we have documented the scaling readiness status from evidence given by the technology providers. The e-catalogs only showcase technologies for which the scaling readiness score is at least 8 for maturity of the idea and 7 for the level of use.
The graph below represents visually the scaling readiness status for this technology, you can see the label of each level by hovering your mouse cursor on the number.
Read more about scaling readiness ›
Semi-controlled environment: prototype
Common use by projects NOT connected to technology provider
| Maturity of the idea | Level of use | |||||||||
| 9 | ||||||||||
| 8 | ||||||||||
| 7 | ||||||||||
| 6 | ||||||||||
| 5 | ||||||||||
| 4 | ||||||||||
| 3 | ||||||||||
| 2 | ||||||||||
| 1 | ||||||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ||
| Country | Testing ongoing | Tested | Adopted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Benin | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Burundi | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Cameroon | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Central African Republic | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Côte d'Ivoire | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Ethiopia | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Ghana | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Kenya | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Malawi | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Mozambique | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Nigeria | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Rwanda | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Senegal | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| South Sudan | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Tanzania, United Republic | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| The Democratic Republic of the Congo | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Togo | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Uganda | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
| Zimbabwe | –No ongoing testing | Tested | Adopted |
This technology can be used in the colored agro-ecological zones. Any zones shown in white are not suitable for this technology.
| AEZ | Subtropic - warm | Subtropic - cool | Tropic - warm | Tropic - cool |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arid | – | – | ||
| Semiarid | – | – | ||
| Subhumid | – | – | ||
| Humid |
Source: HarvestChoice/IFPRI 2009
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals that are applicable to this technology.
By improving crop resilience and reducing pest-related losses, IPM enhances food security and supports sustainable agricultural productivity.
By enhancing natural pest control and promoting adaptable farming practices
IPM minimizes chemical pesticide use, lowering health risks for farmers and communities exposed to agrochemicals.
IPM encourages the responsible use of natural resources by promoting sustainable pest management practices.
The technology strategies involves several steps:
1. Identification and Thresholds
2. Monitoring and Surveillance
3. Insect and Disease Surveys
4. Utilizing Software Tools
5. Threshold-Based Actions
Last updated on Oct 21, 2026