III. Country Statement (Contd.)

PEST MANAGEMENT COURSES IN INDONESIAN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES

Edhi MARTONO

Lecturer, Department of Entomology and Phytopathology,

Faculty of Agriculture, Gadjah Mada University,

Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia

ABSTRACT

The development of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) courses in Indonesian universities and colleges started at the same time as the implementation of IPM programme on rice following the outbreaks of brown planthopper in the late 1970s. IPM, considered the best option, became obligatory because the unilateral approach of using chemical pesticides has failed and has many negative effects.

Today, after a 20-year history in Indonesia, IPM courses form the primary vehicle for disseminating IPM principles and technologies. Close linkage between the courses and field practices provides the students with both theoretical knowledge and practical skills. The multidisciplinary and holistic approach makes the IPM courses particularly attractive. These IPM courses are expected to assume even greater importance in the future as the general population becomes more aware of the environmental issues concerning food production and the associated problems of using pesticides.

INTRODUCTION

The development of pest management courses in most Indonesian's universities started at about the same time with the development of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programme implementation and practice. Back in 1980, after the long struggle with rice brown planthopper which badly incapacitated Indonesian's rice production, it became apparent that a new approach of controlling pests on rice, the main food crop with the biggest area in Indonesia, should be applied without complete dependence on a single control method. That year, the Indonesian's Department of Agriculture, in particular the Directorate General of Food Crop and The National Developmental Planning Board, in cooperation with several leading universities, launched the IPM pilot projects in five different provinces. This was to obtain more information of such pest control programme before a more widespread measure is to be implemented. The Department of Plant Pest, Faculty of Agriculture, Gadjah Mada University (GMU) of Yogyakarta, Indonesia was one of the universities supervising the programme. Others were Bogor Institute of Agriculture (IPB), Brawijaya University, University of North Sumatera and Hasanuddin University. Following these “pioneering” activities, IPM on food and horticultural crops was developed. Since then, there are millions of farmers and thousands of field officers trained in IPM, although these numbers reflect only a small portion of the vast number of farmers in Indonesia (Oka and Suhardjan, 1997).

At about the same time in 1980, the late Mr. Ir. Samino Wirjosuhardjo, a senior lecturer in the Plant Pest department of GMU, was appointed the director of the Estate Crop Protection Directorate, then a newly established directorate in the Directorate General of Estate Crops, Department of Agriculture. The approach taken by Mr. Wirjosuhardjo, especially to protect smallholder estate crops, was integrated control measures with emphasis on natural control. This approach was emphasized since biological control in estate crops in Indonesia has a long and successful history. Also, at that time the biocontrol approach was badly neglected. He started by making an inventory of the natural enemies on diverse commodities, such as coconut; tobacco, cotton, coffee, tea and others. These were done in joint surveys with other universities. Based on these and other related information, a pest control strategy in smallholders' estate crops was developed. Also, a lot of field laboratories for biological control were built in several provinces, many of which are still functioning today.

As new programmes were developed, the need for more competent, able and skilled human resources on IPM, including those with college degrees, became increasingly essential. GMU realized that courses on IPM were lacking. At that time, students had to integrate basic knowledge and skills of crop protection into a working concept of IPM by themselves, or only with minimal guidance. This was a task that may be both intellectually and practically too hard for them. Therefore it was imperative that a course to introduce and integrate knowledge on pest control be established so that students would be able to familiarize themselves with IPM concepts and practice.

The need for IPM implementation increased as it was realized that using pesticides as insurance for better harvest could be hazardous. The unilateral approach of using pesticides was practised widely in almost all commodities, whether they were rice, food and horticultural crops, or estate crops. Oka (1994) found that pesticide use in Indonesia was starting to become a problem and needed a thorough attitudinal change amongst the farmers. The introduction of IPM programme should change farmers' perception in pest control and might improve the deteriorating condition not only in agricultural land, but also in other areas. The Government, although still obsessed with increasing rice production through programmes that conflict with IPM, was actually supportive of IPM implementation. In 1986, the Government issued a Presidential Decree to restrict pesticide use in rice, and later in 1992 passed a Bill stating that pest control applied in agriculture must be done as an IPM programme (Untung, 1993).

Guided by the Presidential Decree and the Bill, agricultural colleges and universities in Indonesia became the disseminating agents for progressive and innovative scientific inquiries on agriculture. More specifically, they played a key role in plant protection to establish a firm and competent ground for IPM in all commodities for the welfare of the society. As a human resource provider, the university mission was to spread the concept and impart the knowledge and skill of IPM to students, as well as, to help technical agencies maintain their level of competency in IPM. GMU has done this task since the late 1970s, resulting in numerous plant protection personnel achieving deep understanding in IPM. But, since the growth of IPM knowledge is never ending, IPM transfer will remain dynamic and never ceases.

HISTORY OF PLANT PEST MANAGEMENT CURRICULUM

IPM courses in GMU started when Dr. Kasumbogo Untung returned from his study leave in Michigan State University in 1979. With very little help, he single-handedly established the IPM courses, putting together the scattered but related basic and applied agricultural entomology courses offered by the Department of Plant Pests. Prior to his return, the courses offered were excellent with a lot of practical exercises. But most of these did not relate to one another. Students usually had hard times to figure out the concept of pest control in an integrated manner because these courses were generally developed and offered independently. With a course called “Integrated Pest Control”, Dr. Untung introduced the principles of pest control as a holistic concept. He guided his students to new and up-to-date information on IPM, including how to develop, implement and sustain IPM programmes that take into consideration biological control, ecological and socio-economic factors. The course was also well supported by practical exercises since during that time the IPM Pioneer Project on Rice was also implemented in Yogyakarta and Central Java under the supervisory care of the Department of Plant Pests. Students experienced both classroom and field IPM knowledge and skills.

Subsequently, from this initial course a more comprehensive and focused course was evolved. Taking advantage of the field practice and IPM implementation programme on rice and other food/horticultural crops, Dr. Untung wrote a textbook to accompany the course. He also requested Professor Harjono Semangoen to teach the plant pathology component so as to have a more rounded IPM course. Both Drs. Untung and Semangoen taught the course by combining field experiences and theoretical insights. Most of their students felt satisfied, as the course helped them greatly to understand IPM. In the early 1990s, Dr. Edhi Martono joined the IPM teaching team after his return from his study in the USA. Dr. Martono introduced IPM field excursions and practical exercises. These additions were also what Drs. Untung and Semangoen had earlier desired but were too busy to undertake the outdoor exercises.

Today IPM has grown into one of the most popular courses in the Faculty of Agriculture. It is a mandatory course for students majoring in Plant Pest and Disease. The practical exercises sometimes are conducted using the Field School method of IPM extension. This involves students making observations in the field, discussing the results, and making decisions concerning the pest control measures and other related issues. The only difference from what farmers are doing is that the students do not have to tend the farm. The exercises also include visits to field laboratory for Pest and Disease Monitoring and Forecasting, meeting and discussing with farmers/farmer groups, class discussions and report writing. Beginning this year, Plant Pathologist Dr. Nursamsi Pusposendjojo will replace Dr. Semangoen who will be retiring.

In the first year of IPM development, Dr. Untung received abundant support from the late Ir. Samino Wirjosuhardjo who, as the director of Estate Crop Plant Protection Directorate, had a lot of information and plans for the Directorate. However, he was not able to conduct the class in Yogyakarta since he was staying in Jakarta. Mr. Wirjosuhardjo went as far as to establish a “S1 Plus” programme that aimed at enriching the graduates of the new Plant Protection discipline with both theoretical and practical knowledge and skills for one year, thereafter assign them to different provinces as pest management officers in local estate crop agency. The courses given during their additional year dealt with technical matters, such as Parasites and Predator Rearing Techniques, Natural Enemies Field Management, Sampling and Observation Techniques, Laboratory Methods for Insect Pathogen, and others. However, there were also some courses that addressed the more theoretical aspect of pest management, such as Pest Control Analysis and Decision-Making, Introduction to System Analysis, Statistical Data Interpretation, and others. Graduates from this programme were placed in provinces outside Java, and later to be involved in establishing biological control laboratories in their respective locations. Their contributions toward IPM development in estate crop commodities were important and were deeply appreciated by many working in estate crop plant protection. Unfortunately, this programme was terminated after its third year of operation, as the Directorate thought the number of graduates from this programme was already sufficient.

In 1979, GMU established its Graduate Division, and Plant Pest became one of the programme studies offered. In this programme study, courses closely related to IPM were offered, namely, Advanced Pest Management, Economic Analysis of Pest Control, Sampling Techniques and Pest Control Modelling. In running these courses, it was clear that GMU was highly committed to the cause of IPM. Graduate students also had the advantage of having Dr. Ida Nyoman Oka, a prominent scientist in Indonesian IPM implementation, as one of the lecturer during his tenure in GMU (1991–1997). He taught the Advanced Pest Management class, and impressed the students with his deep insights in IPM. Presently, Advanced Pest Management and Sampling Techniques are required courses for graduate students. Two others are electives taught by Dr. Untung and an Agricultural Economist, Dr. Slamet Hartono. However, in the last five years, these electives were not taught because Dr. Untung also simultaneously held an office in Jakarta in the State Ministry of Environment. Moreover, the number of students wanting to take the courses was few.

REFORM OF CURRICULUM AND ITS LINKAGE WITH PRACTICE

Each IPM course given in each semester is unique in the sense that although the basic principles remain the same, every new term brings about changes in the practice of IPM with new insights gained from problems encountered in the fields. This was possible since the field implementation of IPM programme was often done together with the university as part of the consultative team. The close relationship of the university and the executing agencies and other related groups (e.g. local Agricultural Offices, both provincial and regional; field laboratories; IPM task forces; farmers' groups; individual farmers) has proven to be very beneficial, particularly for everyone who was involved. Because of this involvement, the university was always aware of the IPM progress, thus making it easier for research of the university to better address the current problems encountered in the field. Sometimes, the university also helped as an extension agency. As a result, the IPM curriculum in the university can be kept up-to-date and revision done while the IPM courses were being conducted.

There was also some minor change made in 1994 when the Department of Education, through its Agriculture Science Education Commission, drafted an obligatory and uniform syllabus for all Plant Pest and Disease departments in universities. No change was made to the course content, except for the name change to IPM course from that of “Pest Control and Habitat Management” (Anonymous, 1996). The name change was more for administrative and bureaucratic purposes.

The close relationship of the course with IPM practice was also made possible with the help of many field officers, most of whom were graduates of GMU and who were very willing to help their fellow students. They opened their laboratories for visits and access to information, as well as, provide space and location for research on IPM components or other IPM related topics. IPM extension for farmers, which was in the form of Farmer Field School (FFS), also provided an excellent opportunity for the students to familiarize themselves with the process of introducing IPM programme at farmer level. Students often used this opportunity for their special topic studies or even thesis research. Up to 1997, there were 61 Bachelor Degree thesis on IPM-related topics (Martono, 1997). In the last three years (1997–1999), there were seven more students' research, with three of them investigating the socio-economic aspect of IPM in rice and vegetables. Through these investigations, students were made to realize that all aspects of IPM were equally important, including those not concerning the biology and ecology of the pests.

Practical exercises in IPM for graduate students were more in the form of visits, discussions and interviews with farmers or IPM officers. Students would visit and attend farmers' meetings, observe farmers' method of examining and monitoring their fields, listen to farmers' discussion and decision-making process, evaluate farmers' activities and write reports. Although this exercise was similar to that assigned to undergraduates, these students were expected to give in-depth reports and more philosophical treatise to what they had observed or learned in the field. Following the report, students were asked to hold class seminars where they will discuss the outcome of the field exercises. These exercises made the students alert and watchful for positive traits needed in IPM programmes and at the same time training them to implement IPM efficiently with farmers.

The relationship between the IPM course taught and the real-life condition is very close, since the teachers for IPM courses have hands-on experiences. Today, they are still deeply involved in many research activities and IPM extension services. The close relationship is also maintained with researchers from other research institutions, officers of IPM task forces, and with field workers and their coordinators. These conditions have been very conducive for introducing IPM to the students. Textbooks for the IPM courses in Indonesian are also available; one by Dr. Kasumbogo Untung (1993, currently under revision) and the other by Dr. Ida Nyoman Oka (1994). Other textbooks in English include “Integrated Pest Management” (1984) by Flint; “The Principles of Pest Management” (1987) by Metcalf and Luckman; and “Entomology and Pest Management” (1990) by Higley, Karr and Pedigo. Scientific journals, periodicals, and numerous proceedings, both in Indonesian and English, are also available for the students.

EXAMPLES IN OTHER AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITIES IN INDONESIA

According to documented record, GMU is the first university to offer courses on IPM. Next was Bogor Agricultural Institute in the early 1980s, with IPM still being offered today. Later, IPM courses were offered by almost all universities with Plant Pest and Disease departments. By 1994, the course was obligatory for all colleges and universities under the heading “Pest Control and Habitat Management”.

For private universities in Yogyakarta, where GMU is located, the IPM concept was quickly adopted since most of the teachers of Plant Protection were either from GMU or other past GMU graduates. Through these courses, private universities also played important role in disseminating IPM concept. Some even undertake research supporting IPM programmes, such as those on botanical pesticides, insect pathogens, planting techniques, multiple cropping system, and others.

The IPM courses in some universities are currently under development with help from the more experienced universities. For example, Surakarta State University is under the supervision of Bogor Agriculture Institute. In the past, GMU has supervised three other universities that are now able to conduct the IPM courses themselves.

The course given in Bogor Agriculture Institute is aptly named Integrated Pest Management for S1 (undergraduate) and Advanced Integrated Pest Management for S2/S3 (graduate). The courses, given with practical (exercises), are of three credits. Field exercises include on-farm observation from nursery to harvest, requiring about 3–4 months (13–16 weeks). These exercises are essential to provide students the experience of IPM practice and to have the correct perception of an IPM programme in operation.

PROSPECTS

The development of IPM needs competent and able human resources with good knowledge of the technical aspects of pest management, including its philosophy, vision, mission, purposes, target and outcome. Such skills and knowledge could only be transferred by those who understand these, both in theory and in practice. Universities and colleges, where most of the principles of pest management are studied, are thus indispensable for IPM programme implementation since they have the resources to accomplish the tasks. On the other hand, the IPM approach is an essential part of crop management. As such, IPM courses should in future be an integral part of agriculture training.

There are obstacles and constraints to IPM implementation. For instance, Oka (1989) noted that farmers have become used to relying excessively on pesticides while extension services for IPM were inadequate and lacking in IPM understanding. These weaknesses were partially overcome after FFS was launched to train farmers in IPM. Universities and colleges played a key role in the launching by providing instructors and the training materials (Martono and Semangun, 1996).

Untung (1995) pointed out that there were still institutional constraints when one considers the need to effectively institutionalize IPM in the present system of agricultural development in Indonesia. These constraints include different perceptions of IPM even by people who are in charge of agriculture. There are conflict of interest between IPM and rice intensification programme, too many strong sectorial interests, difficult bureaucratic system, research is mostly discipline-oriented rather than multi- or trans-disciplines, and difficulties in empowering farmers who are mostly illiterate or of low educational level. To overcome these constraints, a strong political will from the government is needed. This is necessary for large-scale implementation of IPM and for sustaining agricultural development. However, it should be kept in mind that the political will cannot be achieved without sufficient IPM knowledge and understanding from the government executives and decision-makers. Therefore, here lies the importance of universities and colleges to impart the required knowledge and understanding that are crucial to effect the political change.

REFERENCES

Anonymous. 1996. Academic Guide of the Faculty of Agriculture, Gadjah Mada University. 80 pp.

Martono, E. and Semangun, H. 1996. Gagasan dan Penelitian Perlindungan Tanaman untuk Pertanian Masa Depan. Presented at: National Seminar on the Level of Science and Technology Advancement for the 21^st Century. Faculty of Agriculture, Gadjah Mada University, July 1996. 11 pp.

Martono, E. 1997. Proses Metamorfosa Ahli Serangga : Masalah Pembekalan Ilmu-ilmu Dasar Entomologi. Pp. 20–28. In: Proceedings to Bogor Indonesian Entomological Society National Scientific Seminar, January 1997.

Oka, I.N. 1989. The Indonesian Integrated Pest Management Program: Challenges and Advances. Res. Journ. of Indon. Agric. Res. Inst. (8): 12 – 18.

Oka, I.N. 1994. Pengendalian Hama Terpadu dan Implementasinya di Indonesia. Gadjah Mada University Press, Yogyakarta. 255 pp.

Oka, I.N. and Suhardjan. 1997. Tantangan Entomologi pada Abad XXI. Pp. 1–19. In: Proceedings to Bogor Indonesian Entomological Society National Scientific Seminar, January 1997.

Untung, K. 1993. Pengantar Pengelolaan Hama Terpadu. Gadjah Mada University Press, Yogyakarta. 234 pp.

Untung, K. 1995. Institutional Constraints of IPM Implementation in Indonesia. Presented at: International Seminar of IPM in Asia, Hanoi, July 1995. 12 pp.

PLANT PEST MANAGEMENT CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT IN INDONESIA

Soesilo WIBOWO

Lecturer, Bogor Agricultural Extension Academy,
Perumahan No. 6, Jin. Cibalagung No. 1
Bogor 16001, Indonesia

ABSTRACT

The overuse of chemical insecticides in Indonesia has resulted in many undesirable problems, one of which is pest resurgence. For example, most of the rice crops in Java suffered serious attack by the brown planthopper in late 1985. To fight this problem, the Government passed the Presidential Decree No.3-1986 that banned the use of 57 registered brands of broad-spectrum insecticides on rice. This policy was strengthened with Law No. 12-1992 on Plant Culture System. The latter established Integrated Pest Management (IPM) as a key plant protection strategy and also made IPM the responsibility of the community and the Government.

In the follow-up activities, the National IPM Programme (Phase I and II) conducted many training courses to make participants (field pest observers, field extension workers, others) become experts in IPM. Curriculum was developed for each kind of training in order to achieve the respective goal. Over time, various aspects of the IPM training curriculum were improved and integrated with that of the National Agriculture University, so that the trainees have the opportunity to obtain a Diploma 1 (D-1) Programme in IPM. In 1993, this facility was extended to the Agriculture Extension Academy (AEA). The IPM curriculum was improved further and adopted by Bogor AEA and many other AEAs in 1997. Graduates become experts in both the contents and the processes and are capable of growing a healthy crop.

Besides rice, there is urgent need to also develop suitable IPM training curricula for other crops, such as, leafy vegetables, fruit vegetables, tuber vegetables, annual fruits, ornamental plants, medicinal plants and post-harvest products. Other general and related aspects (e.g. management) need also be included.

Currently, the political and economic conditions in Indonesia have posed constraints to IPM development and implementation. Nevertheless, efforts are made to continuously upgrade the curricula, though these may differ slightly for each region.

INTRODUCTION

First of all, I like to congratulate FAO-RAP for organizing this important consultation to help the participating countries in developing plant pest management curriculum.

We know that plant pest management is one of the essential activities in farming/farm business. Initially, this was a very simple activity. But due to advancing knowledge in pest biology and ecology, advances in pest management technologies and progress in other related and supporting science, the pest control methodology has become quite complex and requiring a wide and deep understanding of the subject.

Since the discovery of synthetic organic pesticides in the forties, the use of chemical pesticides has increased significantly, largely because of their good controlling effects on many kinds of pests as well as found economical favourable. This has resulted in many farmers becoming dependent on chemical control and often overdosing their crops. Consequently, the quantity of pesticides used in rice production in Indonesia has increased substantially from 1972–1990.

When applying pesticides in a prophylactic manner, farmers need not have to determine the level of pest infestation. Every insect in the field is assumed a pest and should be destroyed as soon as possible with pesticides. Research has shown that such an approach has many undesirable problems, such as:

• pests soon develop resistance to the pesticide in use
• resurgence of pests caused by pesticides may occur
• useful natural enemies (predators and parasitoids) of pests are destroyed
• destruction of other beneficial insects (e.g. bees, pollinators) and non-target species (e.g. earthworms, scavengers, frogs, snakes, birds)
• killing of fish in ponds and in the rice fields
• human health hazards, e.g. acute and chronic poisonings, including deaths

The above problems have led entomologists to develop Integrated Pest Management (IPM) to help overcome or minimize the use of pesticides. IPM has been defined as “a system of pest population control that combines all kinds of suitable pest control measures in a compatible manner to reduce the population of a pest and maintaining it below the economic threshold level (ETL).”

In the early period of IPM development, the integrating components were mainly biological and chemical control. However, other methods of pest control, including the use of appropriate plant cultivars were subsequently incorporated into the system. In Indonesia, an important task of the National IPM Programme is to help farmers and the agricultural community adopt and practise IPM to achieve high crop yields and sustainability in crop production.

HISTORY OF PLANT PEST MANAGEMENT CURRICULUM

In 1984, Indonesia succeeded in reaching self-sufficiency in rice. However, in 1985, almost 70 % of the rice fields in Java were damaged by the brown planthopper, including the high yielding rice varieties Krueng Aceh and Cisadane. The brown planthopper outbreaks were due to intensive use of broad-spectrum insecticides. This incident led to the Presidential Decree No.3-1986 that banned the use of 57 registered brands of broad-spectrum insecticides on rice. Only a few narrow-spectrum insecticides were allowed. An IPM policy as a plant protection strategy was also established. This was firmly backed up by the Law No.12-1992 on Plant Culture System. The latter required plant protection to adopt IPM and the community and government to be responsible for it.

To implement IPM in farmer communities, the National IPM Program was established. Small-scale training conducted since 1986–1988 showed that IPM was both productive and cost-effective. The National IPM Program Phase 1 (1989–1993) has therefore been continued into Phase 2 (1993–1998) with the following main activities:

• IPM training
• IPM implementation
• Undertake research to support IPM
• Continuous IPM evolvement and development

Some of the IPM training activities have included the following: (1) Basic training for field pest observers (e.g. rice IPM, FFS and IPM of secondary crops), (2) Training-of-Trainers (TOT) to become Field Leader (FL I) and Field Leader II (FL II), and (3) Orientation training for field extension workers by FL I and FL II.

To equip Field Extension Workers with the right skills and expertise in IPM, there was a need to develop a sound curriculum for each kind of training. In general, the subject matters and field guides or requirements were different for each kind of training activity. This was because there were many different crops and conditions, pests and diseases, and also many different farm activities. Table 1 gives an idea on what were included in the training activities.

Table 1. Number of topics and field guides in different kinds of IPM training in Indonesia

For IPM training programmes since 1989, the curricula have always been prepared well ahead to ensure that the goal of the training can be achieved. Table 2 provides an example of the curriculum of IPM-FFS for rice.

Table 2. Rice IPM Curriculum in Indonesia.

THE REFORM OF CURRICULUM

IPM training curriculum has been integrated with the curriculum in the national university to enable Field Pest Observers and opportunity to obtain the Diploma 1 (D-1) Programme in IPM. After training in rice IPM, FFS and IPM in other secondary crops, the Field Pest Observers can undertake additional courses for one semester in the D-1 Programme in IPM at the National University. This D-1 Programme in IPM is carried out in the following national universities:

• IPB Bogor
• UNHAS, Ujung Pandang
• UGM Yogyakarta
• UDAYANA, Denpasar
• USU Medan
• UNAND, Padang
• UNIBRA Malang
• UNILAM, BandarLampung.

Table 3 gives an example of curriculum of the D-1 Programme in IPM used in IPB Bogor.

CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT IN AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITIES
AND RELATED INSTITUTES

Despite successes achieved from IPM training, there are many problems that farmers still need to solve. The National IPM Program therefore increased its activities in the following areas in 1993:

• IPM development for highland vegetable crops (cabbage, tomato and potato) and low land vegetable crops (shallot, white onion, chili).
• IPM-FFS for secondary crops (mainly soybean)
• IPM training at the Agriculture Extension Academy (AEA)
• IPM development for estate crops

The first IPM training in AEA was conducted in Bogor AEA in August 1994. Subsequent ones were carried out in Yogyakarta AEA, Gowa AEA and Medan AEA. The purpose of the IPM training in the AEA was to train Field Extension Workers. The IPM training period in Bogor AEA was of three years from 1994–1996. Due to the programme's success, the IPM curriculum is now integrated into the curriculum of AEAs. This IPM curriculum is as given in Table 4.

Table 3. List of Academic Value of Student.

Education and Culture Department
Bogor Agricultural Institute

List of Academic Value of Student

Table 4. Curriculum in 1995.

The Agricultural Extension Education in AEAs is one of the training courses for graduate Field Extension Workers with D-3 certificate. It is not academic but professional in nature, with more practical training than theory. The number of practice hours is as much as 69 semester credits compared to 51 semester credits for the theory.

Graduates from AEAs in agricultural extension are expected to be knowledgeable in both the course contents and processing of information after spending 6 semesters (3 years). Achievement in content area means that they have mastered the capability of healthy crop cultivation, which is the first principle of IPM. The other aspects of the healthy crop cultivation include:

• Choosing healthy seeds from high yield varieties suitable to the agroclimatic conditions
• Good tillage and planting practices
• Good irrigation
• Balance fertilizing
• IPM
• Good weed control

Subject matters that are needed to fulfil the content area are given in the third, fourth and fifth semesters. Every topic is simplified based on relevant studies suitable for application in the field. In the field learning process, students are divided into groups. For each group, there is a lecturer (or assistant lecturer) who serves as a Field Guide. Besides the main subjects, there are also supplementary ones, such as climatology, cooperatives and principles of agribusiness, all of which are studied from the first until the fifth semesters.

In information extension, students are guided on non-formal adult education methodology and group organizational activities. The activities involve real farm conditions during a crop production season.

During the sixth semester, students are involved in Field Work Lecture which is similar to IPM-FFS. This entails close partnership and working together with the farmers. The activities include planning together in group, decision making by group's participants, experience learning cycle, integrating theory and field practice, learning farm instruments and coordinating/scheduling of activities during a production season. To supplement the Field Work Lecture, seminars, exercises on writing and documentation techniques, and regular lectures on other supportive activities are also carried out at various times until the fifth semester.

Table 5 gives the outline of the IPM curriculum.

Because of IPM success in Agricultural Extension Field, the Directors of AEAs have given instructions to the Animal Husbandry Extension Field and Fishery Extension Field to adopt the IPM approach by selecting and combining appropriate subject matters in their respective areas of activities.

CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT IN IPM TRAINING.

The IPM training curriculum consists of rice IPM, IPM of secondary crops and IPM-FFS guided by the following principles:

• Grow healthy crops
• Conserve natural enemies
• Observe the crop weekly.

Table 5. The IPM Curriculum.

The basic learning features in the IPM training are:

• Rice field serving as the main instrument of teaching and learning
• Experience learning cycle
• Agroecosystem research
• Appropriate methods, materials and technologies
• Curriculum arranged according to the skills needed

Fifty percent of the training time is spent in the rice field as opposed to conventional classroom approach. The experience learning cycle begins with direct observation, experimenting and experience sharing. This is done weekly, together with agroecosystem research and other studies. Every learning activity is supported by appropriate materials/subject matters, which can be applied directly by the farmers. The IPM training curriculum is planned based on developing the skills to make farmers as IPM experts, so that they are able to do IPM themselves and also guide other farmers accordingly. Two main components they are trained to master are the IPM contents and information processing. These are to enable them in making appropriate decisions. Besides rice, the IPM training needed in other crop commodities include:

• Tuber crop (sweet potato)
• Leafy vegetables (spinach)
• Fruit vegetables (tomato)
• Tuber vegetables (potato)
• Annual fruits (melon), Perennial fruits (apple)
• Ornamental plants (rose)
• Medicinal plants

PROSPECTS

Presently, the political climate in Indonesia is still not fully stabilised. The Central Government intends to give part of the authority to the Regional Governments, including the jurisdiction in agriculture. How the changing conditions will affect IPM development in national universities is presently difficult to predict, especially if the allocated budget of the Regional Governments is limited. For Bogor AEAs, the budget is Rp 100 million (about US $ 12,500) a year, with possibly 60 students for each semester. Nevertheless, I am optimistic that the IPM curriculum can be integrated permanently into the curriculum of national universities, especially in Bogor AEAs, for the following reasons.

• The IPM policy is now adopted in all Provinces, because of Law No. 12-1992.
• In almost every region, there are many Field Pest Observers, Field Leader I, Field Leader II and Field Extension Workers who have undergone IPM training.
• In almost every rural area, there are IPM Farmer Leader and IPM farmer graduates.
• The required budget is not too big.
• There are numerous people in the rural communities with strong interest in IPM.

However, the performance of IPM training will differ from region to region, depending on the kind and quality of human resources available in the region and the amount of budget allocated.

In conclusion, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to FAO-RAP for inviting me to this Expert Consultation. I also like to request FAO to provide further technical or financial aid to Indonesia, especially in IPM development activities, both through the universities (professional education) or other related institutes (non-formal education), so that Indonesia may be able to continue actively with its development programmes in plant pest management curriculum.