Step 3. Identify potential alternatives

Purpose

This step aims at identifying potential alternatives to the HHP for the selected crop–pest combinations.

Information required and possible sources

Different categories of alternatives can be evaluated, ranging from physical measures, to host-plant resistance, to biocontrol, to low-risk synthetic pesticides. Alternatives may include options already available in the country or region, having shown to be effective in other parts of the world, or still in a development stage.

Possible sources of information on alternatives include:

Information	Possible sources (also see the Internet resources and Case studies pages)
Non-chemical production approaches (e.g. organic production, zero budget natural farming)	Non-chemical production systems that are already operational in the country or in countries with similar agricultural conditions. Relevant databases, web sites, publications and books
Biological control	National and international research institutes Relevant databases, web sites, publications and books
Biopesticides registered for the given crop–pest combination	National pesticide register Pesticide registers in other countries Biopesticide importers or distributors in the country Biopesticide databases
Low-risk synthetic pesticides	National pesticide register Pesticide registers in other countries Pesticide importers or distributors in the country
Combinations of the above (e.g. IPM, IVM, agroecology)	IPM, IVM, agroecology systems that are already operational in the country National and international research institutes Relevant databases, web sites, publications and books
Pipeline solutions (not yet operational)	Scientific publications

Procedures

Compile as many options as possible to replace the HHP for the prioritized crop-pest combination, taking into account the various categories of alternatives.
Special attention should be given to combinations of pest management measures as synergies between control practices may lead to pest suppression which far exceeds the sum of the separate individual measures.
Make use of locally available sources (e.g. research institutions, plant protection experts, NGOs active in agriculture or public health, (bio)pesticide importers and distributors), information from neighbouring countries that have gone through a similar process, along with relevant international sources. The Internet resources page can assist in this search.
Check whether relevant Case studies are available which can provide ideas about the process of identifying alternatives, as well as successful cases of replacing HHPs or other high-risk pesticides by low-risk alternatives.
A regulator can decide to:
- gather information directly from key stakeholders on all possible alternatives; or
- establish a technical expert panel; or
- commission a study to a research institution.
If the pesticide to be substituted is extensively used in more than one country, there might be scope to establish a regional collaboration initiative on alternatives.

It is important in this step to compile as many options as possible to replace the HHP. The evaluation of what is feasible in the local situation will be done in the next step.

Example summary of the identification of potential alternatives for HHP-X, for a priority crop-pest combination, in a hypothetical country

Pesticide to be replaced: HHP-X Crop: Cotton Pest: American bollworm (Helicoverpa armigera)
Possible conclusions: Several potential alternatives to HHP-X are known to be effective against American bollworm in cotton. Some of these alternatives are already available in the country.
Alternative	Application/Use	Country	Remarks	Source
Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki	Applied as biopesticide	Registered in this country Used in various other countries	Commercially available in this country. Biopesticides are VAT exempted	Local biopesticide importer
Trichogramma spp. (various species)	Inundative release of the parasitoid at the egg stage of the bollworm.	India	Requires local mass rearing facility; or importation of commercial Trichogramma egg cards. Exact species to be checked.	CABI
Helicoverpa armigera nuclear polyhedrosis virus (HaNPV)	Applied as biopesticide	Kenya	Can be produced at farm level, but in limited quantities Biopesticides are VAT exempted	CABI
IPM – SIRATAC system		Australia	Request national cotton research institute to assess its relevance for the local situation	CSIRO
IPM – FFS approach		Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso	Cost-effectiveness has been shown under similar conditions	FAO
Insecticide Q	Low-risk insecticide Effective against early instar larvae	Registered in this country Used in several countries in Latin America	Rapid resistance development observed in several countries. Would require resistance management plan (e.g. rotation).	Pesticide register National cotton research institute
Insecticide P	Low-risk insecticide Applied against early and mid instar larvae	Used widely in the USA and Australia Not registered in this country	Resistance development observed, but seems relatively slow if used in rotation	CSIRO

Outcome of Step 3

A list of potential alternatives to the HHP in the prioritized crop-pest combination(s), for further assessment.

Navigation

Next: Step 4. Compare alternatives and identify viable options

Back: Step 2. Evaluate crops/pests for which alternative(s) need to be sought