Engineering Pest-Free Fields: How NPM Turns Insect Behaviour into Sustainable Agriculture

Engineering Pest-Free Fields: How NPM Turns Insect Behaviour into Sustainable Agriculture

Non-pesticidal management (NPM) at the Centre for Sustainable Agriculture (CSA) grew out of a very simple but radical insight:

“Pest is not a problem but a symptom.” 

If pests are a symptom of ecological disturbance, then the real work is to rebuild ecological balance, not chase every insect with a newer molecule.

1. How NPM evolved at CSA

From Red Hairy Caterpillar to a statewide programme

In the late 1980s, dryland farmers in Telangana were losing early-sown castor, groundnut, sesame and pigeonpea to red hairy caterpillar (Amsacta albistriga). Resowing was common on more than 30% of the area, compounding the risk of delayed rains. 

By sitting with farmers, voluntary agencies and a few entomologists, CSA’s parent organisation (Centre for World Solidarity CWS) unpacked the biology of the pest:

  • it was largely restricted to light red soils
  • adults emerged in synchronised waves at monsoon onset and were highly attracted to light
  • larvae pupated in soil and late instars were so hairy that sprays hardly touched them 

This led to a behaviour-based, non-chemical package:

  • deep summer ploughing to expose pupae
  • community bonfires and light traps to attract and kill adults
  • trenches and trap plants (Calotropis, wild castor) to intercept marching larvae
  • neem sprays on very early instars, before hair cover develops 

Implemented across 95 villages and 18,000+ ha, it cut resowing from >30% of the area to about 4%. 

This experience crystallised two core ideas that later defined NPM:

  1. Use the pest’s biology against itself instead of fighting it head-on with poisons.
  2. Treat pest management as organised community action, not an individual farmer’s spray decision.

Through the 1995, CWS and partners convened national workshops on NPM, documented farmer innovations and worked with ICRISAT and others to refine field methods such as shaking pigeonpea plants to dislodge Helicoverpa larvae onto sheets, then killing them or using them to multiply NPV. 

By early 2000s, village-level successes like Punukula and Enabavi showed that even cotton and chillies could be grown without synthetic pesticides, with lower costs and better net returns. 

From 2005 onward, with Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty (SERP) Andhra Pradesh, this evolved into Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture (CMSA). Federations of women’s SHGs ran farmer field schools, managed local NPM input enterprises (e.g., neem seed powder units, NPV units) and scaled the approach to more than 3000 villages and ~1.4 million acres by 2008–09. 

The National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture later adopted this experience as a climate-adaptation strategy. 

2. The NPM framework: ecology, behaviour and prevention

NPM is an ecological approach to pest management that relies on knowledge- and skill-based practices to prevent insects from reaching damaging stages and proportions, using local resources, natural processes and community action; chemical pesticides are excluded by design. 

The framework rests on three interlinked pillars:

  1. Understanding and redesigning the crop ecosystem
  2. Understanding insect biology and behaviour, and acting at vulnerable points
  3. Building farmers’ knowledge, skills and collective institutions

2.1 Crop ecosystem: make the habitat work for you

Key preventive practices include:

  • Good seed and seed health
  • Reducing stress and building healthy soils
  • Habitat diversification
  • Trap and border crops
  • Crop-specific agronomic tweaks

The philosophy here is: if the ecosystem is well-designed, most of the “pest management” happens before the pest arrives.

3. Insect behaviour as the entry point

When farmers understand the pest’s life history and behaviour, complex problems can be broken into simple, local actions.

3.1 Life cycle and stage-selective tactics

Most serious pests undergo complete metamorphosis. They damage crops only in the larval stage; eggs and pupae are immobile and adults are often highly mobile but vulnerable to traps. 

NPM turns this into a design principle:

  • Adults (mobile, often attracted to cues)
  • Eggs (immobile, highly clumped or strongly site-preferred)
  • Larvae (damaging but still interceptable)
  • Pupae (hidden but often concentrated)

The method is conceptually simple:

“Map the life cycle, find the weak stages, and design low-cost, local interventions that farmers can implement collectively.”

3.2 “Green sprays” as last line, not first reflex

When despite prevention the pest still crosses field-level tolerance, NPM relies on botanicals and fermented products:

  • neem seed kernel extract, chilli–garlic–kerosene concoctions, five-leaf latex mixtures, fermented cow-dung–urine extracts etc., prepared locally as aqueous extracts, decoctions, concoctions or fermented products. 

These are reactive but still behaviour-or physiology-based (repellence, antifeedant effects, growth disruption), and crucially they do not collapse natural enemy populations the way broad-spectrum insecticides do.

4. Climate change, pest shifts and why prevention matters even more

Climate change is already shifting pest complexes:

  • rise of sucking pests (mealybugs, jassids, whiteflies, thrips) and associated viral diseases in cotton, groundnut, vegetables and fruit crops
  • altered rainfall, temperature and humidity patterns changing pest migration and viability thresholds 

the appropriate response is not “stronger” pesticides but stronger ecological literacy:

understanding insect biology and behaviour, adopting suitable preventive measures to reduce pest numbers, enhancing farmers’ skills to use local resources and natural processes, and organising community action. 

In other words, the same NPM framework becomes a ecosystem-adaptation strategy.

5. Case studies that illustrate the framework

5.1 Punukula: from pesticide hotspot to pesticide-free village

https://csa-india.org/2023/11/22/punukula-stories-1st-pesticide-free-village-in-india-in-2005/

Punukula in Khammam district moved from heavy pesticide use in cotton and chillies, dealer-driven credit, and pesticide-linked health problems to declaring itself pesticide-free in 2004. 

Key features:

  • The farmers enforced a social norm of “no synthetic pesticides”, and Village Panchayat officially declared village as pesticide free and put a ban on campaign, sale and use of chemical pesticides.
  • NPM practices (trap crops, botanicals, pheromone traps) cut plant protection costs roughly in half and turned negative net incomes into positive ones; in one comparison, NPM cotton yielded slightly higher than conventional while plant protection costs were halved, turning a net loss in sprayed cotton into a profit in NPM cotton. 
  • Pesticide shops stopped coming to the village; health complaints from spraying reduced sharply; wage labourers now had more work (neem seed collection, preparation of NPM inputs) but less toxic exposure. 

Punukula showed that behavioural and preventive NPM is economically viable, not just “ideologically clean”.

5.2 Enabavi: an “organic village” with social regulation

https://csa-india.org/2023/11/22/enabavi-stories-1st-organic-village-in-india-in-2006/

in 2005 Enabavi in Warangal district converted all 113 ha to non-chemical farming, including cotton, chilli, tobacco and vegetables. The shift started with NPM, then extended to soil fertility management (tank silt, FYM, vermicompost) and local seed systems. 

Important elements:

  • Social regulation: no external regulation, but strong village-level norms against chemical use.
  • Men’s and women’s SHGs run thrift, seed saving and input self-reliance.
  • Children are deliberately involved in NPM training, creating continuity of behavioural knowledge. 

5.3 Statewide Community Managed Sustainable Agriculture (CMSA) through SERP

https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/805101468267916659/pdf/759610WP0P118800agriculture0AP02009.pdf

Within two years of the initial pilots, the NPM programme spread to 1250 villages, ~80,000 ha and ~80,000 farmers across 17 districts, with average savings on pest management ranging from about ₹600 to ₹6000 per ha depending on crop, without yield loss. 

By 2007–08, more than 350,000 farmers were practising NPM on ~280,000 ha, supported by 60+ federations of SHGs, cluster and village activists, neem and NPV enterprises, and community seed banks. 

This is essentially not just behavioural change at state scale, structured community management through women-led institutions.

6. Public communication: from fields to prime time

The scientific and field work on NPM has been amplified through mass-media stories, films and talks that carry the same core message: “we don’t need poisons for good yields; we need knowledge and better systems.”

Awards

  • 2005: World Bank Development Place Award for 'Tradition with a twist'
  • 2014: Best Rural innovation Award for 'Non Pesticidal Management' in Bihar Rural Innovation Forum organized by Government of Bihar, Rural Development Department, Government of India and World Bank
  • 2014: Best Rural innovation Award for 'Community Managed Sustainable Agricutlure' in Maharashtra Rural Innovation Forum organized by Government of Maharashtra, Rural Development Department, Government of India and World Bank

Together, these have helped move NPM from being a “project method” in Andhra Pradesh to part of a national conversation on safe food and sustainable agriculture. It later became mainstreamed through Mahila Krishi Sasaktikaran Pariyojana (MKSP). The Community Managed Extension System using practicing farmers and Farmer Field Schools to train farmers on understanding and managing their agroecosystems also became popular in the mainstream programs since then.

7. Putting it all together

A concise way to describe the CSA NPM framework is:

  1. Diagnose the system, not just the pest.
  2. Use insect behaviour as the design brief.
  3. Invest heavily in prevention.
  4. Reserve reactive measures for truly exceptional situations – and keep them ecological.
  5. Anchor the whole system in strong community institutions and public communication.

The practical outcome is that pest populations are usually kept below damaging levels without synthetic pesticides, farmers’ costs and health risks come down, and the agro-ecosystem becomes more resilient to climate-driven pest shifts.

If you tell this story in your own voice, you already have the best punchline:

“The goal is not to kill every insect. It is to make our farms such bad hotels for pests that they never manage to throw a party.”

To view or add a comment, sign in

More articles by Ramanjaneyulu G V

Explore content categories