The role of assessment and evaluation in IPM implementation

Carol L. Pilcher, Edwin G. Rajotte

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter


IPM is, by many accounts, a highly successful program. Some claim that the achievements over the last 40 years have given the program a mark of success. In fact, IPM has been described as “one of the best answers to reducing chemical contamination of the environment and improving the safety of food while maintaining agricultural viability” (Rajotte, 1993, p. 297). Others argue that implementation has been slow and success has been limited. Wearing (1988) stated that IPM has not been successful because some IPM technologies have not been adopted by growers. This limited success has resulted in a weakening of political support and a stagnation of funding for IPM in the USA (Gray, 2001). What defines a successful IPM program? How do we assess the true worth of an IPM program? These questions can be answered by conducting an assessment of IPM programs through program evaluation. However, the starting point of any IPM evaluation is made with three goals in mind; economic, an assessment of the costs and benefits; environmental, impacts on soil, water and non-pest organisms; and social, an assessment of a program's impact on people's health and well-being. A historical review of IPM evaluation, Evaluation has been a component of some pest management programs, starting back in the 1940s. During this time (1940s to 1960s), program evaluations were used to assess the needs of clients and determine the future directions (Allen & Rajotte, 1990).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationIntegrated Pest Management
Subtitle of host publicationConcepts, Tactics, Strategies and Case Studies
PublisherCambridge University Press
Number of pages10
ISBN (Electronic)9780511626463
ISBN (Print)9780521875950
StatePublished - Jan 1 2008

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • General Agricultural and Biological Sciences


Dive into the research topics of 'The role of assessment and evaluation in IPM implementation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this