BACKGROUND: Arable crops in temperate climatic regions such as the UK and Ireland are subject to a multitude of pests (weeds, diseases and vertebrate/invertebrate pests) that can negatively impact productivity if not properly managed. Integrated pest management (IPM) is widely promoted as a sustainable approach to pest management, yet there are few recent studies assessing adoption levels and factors influencing this in arable cropping systems in the UK and Ireland. This study used an extensive farmer survey to address both these issues.RESULTS: Adoption levels of various IPM practices varied across the sample depending on a range of factors relating to both farm and farmer characteristics. Positive relationships were observed between IPM adoption and farmed area, and familiarity with IPM. Choice of pest control information sources was also found to be influential on farmer familiarity with IPM, with those who were proactive in seeking information from impartial sources being more engaged and reporting higher levels of adoption.CONCLUSION: Policies that encourage farmers to greater levels of engagement with their pest management issues and more proactive information seeking, such as through advisory professionals, more experienced peers through crop walks, open days and discussion groups should be strongly encouraged.
Value chain analysis (VCA) calculated the financial effects on food chain actors of interventions to improve animal health and welfare in the intensive pig sector. Two interventions to reduce production diseases were studied. A generic chain diagram of linkages between stakeholders and value-added dimensions was designed. Data on structure and financial performance were collected for the sector. The production parameters and financial effects of the interventions were then described to illustrate impact on the supply chain. The effects of the interventions were also assessed at market level using economic welfare analysis. The sectors in Finland and the UK are small in farm numbers and few companies produced much of the output in a largely vertically-integrated structure. The most beneficial intervention in financial terms to farmers was improved hygiene in pig fattening (around +50% in gross margin). It was calculated to reduce the consumer price for pig meat by up to 5% when applied at large, whereas for improved management measures, it would reduce consumer price by less than 0.5%. However, the latter added value also through food quality attributes. We show that good hygiene and animal care can add value. However, evaluation of the financial and social viability of the interventions is needed to decide what interventions are adopted. The structure of supply chains influences which policy measures could be applied. Of the two interventions, improved pig hygiene had the largest potential to improve efficiency and reduce costs. The studied interventions can also provide new business opportunities to farms, slaughterhouses and food sector companies. More evidence is needed to support public policies and business decision-making in the sector. For this, evidence on consumer attitudes to production diseases is needed. Nevertheless, the study makes an important contribution by showing how improvements in health and welfare benefit the whole chain.