Pesticide Registration Toolkit

Step 5. Develop a plan to implement alternative(s)


This step aims at guiding the development of a plan to introduce and adopt the identified alternatives in the targeted farming or public health systems.

This can take the form of an action plan, a roadmap, or another type of plan. A plan is , in principle, made for each HHP or other high risk pesticide for which alternatives have been identified.

Having identified one or more viable alternatives to an HHP is an important step forward, but effectively implementing such alternatives may not be an easy undertaking. It requires careful planning and involvement of all relevant stakeholders.

Structure of the plan

A plan for implementation of alternatives will generally include three vital elements: what, who, and when.

“What” lists the steps and/or actions needed to achieve effective implementation of the alternative;

“Who” refers to the institutions and/or persons responsible for each action; and

“When” indicates the timelines and projected completion dates of each action.

Other elements that can be included are: how to measure progress, what resources are needed, whether specific financial support should be mobilized.

Information required

Implementation plans will be different from one country to another, as they are specific to the local legal, administrative, agronomic, economic and social conditions. Nevertheless, a number of issues will often need to be addressed:

  • Is any modification of legislation needed to implement the alternative? If so, what revision is required in which law or regulation; which ministry is responsible for the legislation; and what is the timeline needed?

  • Is any new or revised (bio)pesticide registration required? Does this call for any new data to be generated; is an application by a registrant required; or a more simple amendment by the registration authority; is a fast-track procedure needed and possible?

  • Is any applied research needed before an alternative can be proposed to users?

  • What time lags are likely to occur for some of the alternatives to become available to farmers?

  • Should an outreach and communication strategy be established? Who should be targeted, by whom, with what type of information, using which communication platforms?

  • Should farmers or other pesticide users be trained to be able to apply the alternative? If so, what type of training is required; who will provide the training; can existing extension and advisory channels be used; what materials or curricula need to be developed?

  • Which actions are primarily government responsibilities; and which actions can or should be taken on by the private sector?

  • Should a coordination mechanism be established? What form should it take (for instance an inter-departmental working group and/or a stakeholder platform)? Who should be involved?

  • How will implementation be monitored and by whom? How will the results of monitoring be used to modify the proposed alternatives? How will farmers or other users of the HHP be informed about the results of the changes that were put into practice, the difficulties and solutions encountered, and the benefits obtained.


Active stakeholder collaboration is essential for the elaboration of an action plan. Successful implementation of the identified alternative(s) will always depend on more than one stakeholder and in some cases may involve a large number of them. It is therefore important to ensure that all key stakeholders are at the table when developing the plan.

The development of the action plan can be coordinated by a lead ministry, a lead expert institution (e.g. a research institute), or by a small but representative stakeholder committee. In some cases, it may be particularly practical to assign different leads to the different actions in the plan.

It is often more effective to elaborate the action plan in a relatively short time period, rather than stretch this process of a longer period. This is to take advantage of group dynamism and minimize planning fatigue. Any uncertainties in the plan should then be clearly spelled out, however, and a mechanism for monitoring progress and updating the plan put into place.

Outcome of Step 5

  • An action plan or roadmap leading to the effective implementation of the identified viable alternative(s)



Back: Step 4 – Compare alternatives and identify viable options