Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7tmb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-05T00:42:25.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 3 - Economic decision rules for IPM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2010

By
Leon G. Higley  and
Robert K. D Peterson
Edited by
Edward B. Radcliffe ,
William D. Hutchison  and
Rafael E. Cancelado
Edward B. Radcliffe
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
William D. Hutchison
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Get access

Summary

The year 2009 marks the 50th anniversary of the elaboration of the economic injury level (EIL) and the economic threshold (ET) concepts by Stern et al. (1959). The EIL and ET are widely recognized as the most important concepts in IPM. Because IPM is posited on the premise that certain levels of pests and pest injury are tolerable, the EIL and ET represent a crucial underpinning for any theory of IPM. Given the centrality of economic decision rule concepts to IPM, it follows that every IPM program should be based on these concepts. But this clearly is not the case. Why? In this chapter, we will discuss the historical development of economic decision levels, current approaches, and limitations of the EIL and ET. Finally, we will argue that EILs should be incorporated much more into IPM programs and that EILs are central to the continued development of environmental and economic sustainability concepts so important to IPM.

Economic decision levels

The concept of tolerating pest injury was not introduced by Stern et al. (1959); it was discussed at least as early as 1934 (Pierce, 1934) but does not seem to have been developed further until 1959 (Kogan, 1998). In response to failures in pest control in California because of insecticide resistance by pests and insecticide mortality of natural enemies, Stern et al. (1959) first proposed the fundamental concepts of the EIL, the ET, economic damage and pest status.

Type
Chapter
Information
Integrated Pest Management
Concepts, Tactics, Strategies and Case Studies
 , pp. 25 - 32
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Backman, P. A. & Jacobi, J. C. (1996). Thresholds for plant-disease management. In Economic Thresholds for Integrated Pest Management, eds. Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. P., pp. 114--127. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Barrigossi, J. A. F., Hein, G. L. & Higley, L. G. (2003). Economic injury levels and sequential sampling plans for Mexican bean beetle (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on dry beans. Journal of Economic Entomology, 96, 1160–1167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brethour, C. & Weersink, A. A. (2001). An economic evaluation of the environmental benefits from pesticide reduction. Agricultural Economics, 25, 219–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, G. C. (1997). Simple models of natural enemy action and economic thresholds. American Entomologist, 43, 117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,Centers for Disease Control (2003). Epidemic/Epizootic West Nile Virus in the United States: Guidelines for Surveillance, Prevention, and Control. Fort Collins, CO: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, National Center for Infectious Diseases, Division of Vector-Borne Infectious Diseases.Google Scholar
Florax, R. J. G. M., Travisi, C. M. & Nijkamp, P. (2005). A meta-analysis of the willingness to pay for reductions in pesticide risk exposure. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 32, 441–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galvin, T. L., Burkness, E. C., Vickers, Z.et al. (2007) Sensory-based action threshold for the multicolored Asian lady beetle-related taint in wine grapes. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 58, 518–522.Google Scholar
Haile, F. J. (1999). Physiology of plant tolerance to arthropod injury. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.Google Scholar
Hammond, R. B. (1996). Limitations to economic injury levels and thresholds. In Biotic Stress and Yield Loss, eds. Peterson, R. K. D. & Higley, L. G., pp. 58–73. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Hammond, R. B. & Pedigo, L. P. (1982). Determination of yield-loss relationships for two soybean defoliators by using simulated insect-defoliation techniques. Journal of Economic Entomology, 75, 102–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, R. B., Higley, L. G., Pedigo, L. P.et al. (2000). Simulated insect defoliation on soybean: influence of row width. Journal of Economic Entomology, 93, 1429–1436.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higley, L. G. (1992). New understandings of soybean defoliation and their implications for pest management. In Pest Management of Soybean, eds. Copping, L. G., Green, M. B. & Rees, R. T., pp. 56–65. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higley, L. G. (2001). Yield loss and pest management. In Biotic Stress and Yield Loss, eds. Peterson, R. K. D. & Higley, L. G., pp. 13–22. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. P. (1996). The EIL concept. In Economic Thresholds for Integrated Pest Management, eds. Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. P., pp. 9–21. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Higley, L. G. & Peterson, R. K. D. (1996). The biological basis of the economic injury level. In Economic Thresholds for Integrated Pest Management, eds. Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. P., pp. 22–40. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Higley, L. G. & Wintersteen, W. K. (1992). A novel approach to environmental risk assessment of pesticides as a basis for incorporating environmental costs into economic injury levels. American Entomologist, 38, 34–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higley, L. G., Browde, J. A. & Higley, P. M. (1993). Moving towards new understandings of biotic stress and stress interactions. In International Crop Science I, eds. Buxton, D. R.et al., pp. 749–754. Madison, WI: Crop Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Hutchins, S. H. & Funderburk, J. E. (1991). Injury guilds: a practical approach for managing pest losses in soybean. Agricultural Zoology Review, 4, 1–21.Google Scholar
Hutchins, S. H., Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. G. (1988). Injury equivalency as a basis for developing multiple-species economic injury levels. Journal of Economic Entomology, 81, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogan, M. (1998). Integrated pest management: historical perspectives and contemporary developments. Annual Review of Entomology, 43, 243–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kovach, J., Petzold, C., Degni, J. & Tette, J. (1992). A Method to Measure the Environmental Impact of Pesticides. New York Food and Life Sciences Bulletin No. 139. Geneva, NY: Cornell University, New York Agricultural Experiment Station. Available at http://ecommons.library.cornell.edn/handle/1813/5203.Google Scholar
Lohr, L., Park, T. & Higley, L. (1999). Farmer risk assessment for voluntary insecticide reduction. Ecological Economics, 30, 121–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malone, S., Herbert, D. A. Jr. & Holshouser, D. L. (2002). Relationship between leaf area index and yield in double-crop and full-season soybean systems. Journal of Economic Entomology, 95, 945–951.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mortensen, D. A. & Coble, H. D. (1996). Economic thresholds for weed management. In Economic Thresholds for Integrated Pest Management, eds. Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. P., pp. 89–113. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Ostlie, K. R. & Pedigo, L. P. (1985). Soybean response to simulated green cloverworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) defoliation: progress toward determining comprehensive economic injury levels. Journal of Economic Entomology, 78, 437–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostlie, K. R. & Pedigo, L. P. (1987). Incorporating pest survivorship into economic thresholds for pest management. Journal of Economic Entomology, 80, 297–303.Google Scholar
Pedigo, L. P. (1996). General models of economic thresholds. In Economic Thresholds for Integrated Pest Management, eds. Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. P., pp. 41–57. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Pedigo, L. P. & Schaik, J. W. (1984). Time-sequential sampling: a new use of the sequential probability ratio test for pest management decisions. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America, 30, 32–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedigo, L. P., Hutchins, S. H. & Higley, L. G. (1986). Economic injury levels in theory and practice. Annual Review of Entomology, 31, 341–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedigo, L. P., Higley, L. G. & Davis, P. M. (1989). Concepts and advances in economic thresholds for soybean entomology. In Proceedings of the 4th World Soybean Research Conference, vol. 3, ed. Pascale, A. J., pp. 1487–1493. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Asociación Argentina de la Soja.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. K. D. (1996). The status of economic decision level development. In Economic Thresholds for Integrated Pest Management, eds. Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. P., pp. 151–178. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. K. D. & Higley, L. G. (1993). Arthropod injury and plant gas exchange: current understandings and approaches for synthesis. Trends in Agricultural Sciences, 1, 93–100.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. K. D. & Higley, L. G. (2001). Illuminating the black box: the relationship between injury and yield. In Biotic Stress and Yield Loss, eds. Peterson, R. K. D. & Higley, L. G., pp. 1–12. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. K. D. & Higley, L. G. (2002). Economic decision levels. In Encyclopedia of Pest Management, ed. Pimentel, D., pp. 228–230. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. K. D. & Hunt, T. E. (2003). The probabilistic economic injury level: incorporating uncertainty into pest management decision-making. Journal of Economic Entomology, 98, 536–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, W. D. (1934). At what point does insect attack become damage? Entomological News, 45, 1–4.Google Scholar
Poston, F. L., Pedigo, L. P. & Welch, S. M. (1983). Economic injury levels: reality and practicality. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America, 29, 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raupp, M. J., Davidson, J. A., Koehler, C. S., Sadof, C. S. & Reichelderfer, K. (1988). Decision-making considerations for aesthetic damage caused by pests. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America, 34, 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sadof, C. S. & Raupp, M. J. (1996). Aesthetic thresholds and their development. In Economic Thresholds for Integrated Pest Management, eds. Higley, L. G. & Pedigo, L. P., pp. 203–226. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Saphores, J.-D. M. (2000). The economic threshold with a stochastic pest population: a real options approach. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 82, 541–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, V. M., Smith, R. F., Bosch, R. & Hagen, K. S. (1959). The integrated control concept. Hilgardia, 29, 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, J. D. & Pedigo, L. P. (1972). Development and economic-injury level of the green cloverworm on soybean in Iowa. Journal of Economic Entomology, 65, 197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tammes, P. M. L. (1961). Studies of yield losses. II. Injury as a limiting factor of yield. Tijdschrift over Plantenziekten, 67, 257–263.Google Scholar
Welter, S. C. (1989). Arthropod impact on plant gas exchange. In Insect–Plant Interactions, vol. 1, ed. Bernays, E. A., pp. 135–151. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, L. T. 1985. Developing economic thresholds in cotton. In Integrated Pest Management in Major Agricultural Systems, eds. Frisbie, R. E. & Adkisson, P. L., pp. 308–344. College Station, TX: Texas Agricultural Experiment Station.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×