Báo cáo Assessing the effectiveness of Farmer Field Schools for Implementation of Citrus IPM in Viet Nam

Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development  
_____________________________________________________________________  
CARD Project Progress Report  
036/04VIE  
Assessing the effectiveness of Farmer Field  
Schools for Implementation of Citrus IPM  
in Viet Nam  
MS6: THIRD SIX-MONTHLY REPORT  
1
INSTITUTE INFORMATION  
Project Name  
Assessing the effectiveness of Farmer Field Schools  
for Implementation of Citrus IPM in Viet Nam  
Vietnamese Institution  
Plant Protection Department  
Vietnamese Project Team Leader Mr Ho Van Chien  
Australian Organisation  
Australian Personnel  
Date commenced  
University of Western Sydney  
Debbie Rae, Oleg Nicetic, Robert Spooner-Hart  
January 2005  
Completion date (original)  
Completion date (revised)  
Reporting period  
December 2006  
January to July 2006  
Contact Officer(s)  
In Australia: Team Leader  
Name:  
Position:  
Debbie Rae  
Research Program  
Coordinator  
Telephone:  
Fax:  
+61245701118  
+61245701103  
Organisation University of Western Sydney Email:  
In Australia: Administrative contact  
Name:  
Position:  
Gar Jones  
Director, Research Services  
Telephone:  
Fax:  
+6124736 0631  
+6124736 0905  
Organisation University of Western  
Email:  
Sydney  
In Vietnam  
Name:  
Position:  
Mr Ho Van Chien  
Director  
Organisation Southern Regional Plant  
Telephone:  
Fax:  
Email:  
+8473834476  
+8473834477  
Protection Centre  
2
1. Project Abstract  
Citrus is an important fruit crop in Viet Nam but productivity and production are impeded  
by a range of pests and diseases. Integrated pest management (IPM) is widely recognised  
as an effective and sustainable method of pest and disease control. Viet Nam has a well-  
developed National IPM program of farmer participatory training and research using  
Farmer Field Schools (FFS), which has trained more than 500,000 farmers in IPM  
technologies for rice, vegetable, cotton, tea, soybean, peanut, and sweet potato crops.  
Prior to this project the Vietnamese capacity to train farmers in citrus IPM technologies  
was very limited. Capacity has now been significantly increased by this project and by  
November 2006 more than 2,200 farmers will have completed season long training in  
citrus IPM. In order to achieve this level of farmer training the capacity of extension  
workers has also been significantly enhanced. In 2005, 98 extension workers undertook  
training in citrus IPM, and subsequently facilitated 24 FFS across 12 provinces in the  
Mekong Delta and the Central Coast regions of Viet Nam. In 2006 a total of 111 trainers  
were trained and those trainers are currently facilitating 52 FFS across 11 provinces in the  
Mekong Delta and the Central Coast regions.  
2. Executive Summary  
Viet Nam has a well-developed National IPM program that has resulted in more than  
500,000 farmers being trained in IPM technologies for rice, vegetable, cotton, tea,  
soybean, peanut, and sweet potato crops. Prior to this project no IPM training had  
been conducted in citrus, despite it being an important fruit crop in Viet Nam. In the  
first six months of 2006 efficient planning and sustained efforts by all project  
personnel has resulted in 111 master trainers being trained by 11 key scientists, and  
these trainers successfully commencing 52 FFS in 11 provinces in the Mekong Delta  
and Central Coast regions of Viet Nam. The FFS program has been modified after  
feedback from the project review meetings held in November 2005. These  
modifications include the FFS starting earlier and finishing later with less frequent  
sessions to allow all phenological stages of citrus from flowering to harvest to be  
included in the program. The timing of FFS meetings is determined by the local  
facilitators in order to closely coincide with the most important citrus growth periods  
and critical stages of pest and disease development within the local region. Teaching  
demonstration trials have also been implemented at all FFS. A farmer practice  
baseline study was conducted at 9 locations and all farmers participating in FFS  
completed a 52-question pre- and post-intervention survey. All components of the  
project logframe for the first 6 months of 2006 have been completed.  
3. Introduction & Background  
Citrus fruit is one of the major fruit crops in Vietnam and citrus production is an  
important source of income for many Vietnamese farmers. However, a range of pests  
and diseases seriously impedes productivity and production of citrus in Vietnam. This  
3
project has adopted the methods of participatory based learning and action based  
research to train Plant Protection Department extension officers and farmers in  
improved methods of citrus cultivation and management of pests and diseases.  
Increased trainer and farmer knowledge of citriculture and IPM methods will allow  
better-informed decisions about citrus growing and pest and disease management.  
The training program involves Training of Trainers (TOT) by key research scientists  
and extension workers in citrus IPM, followed by season long Farmer Field Schools  
(FFS) conducted by trainers in their local regions. Training conducted as part of this  
project is contributing to the establishment of a network of citrus IPM Trainers  
throughout the Mekong Delta and the Central Coast regions of Viet Nam. Increasing  
the number of extension workers who have undertaken training in citrus IPM will  
significantly enhance the capacity of the Plant Protection Department extension  
network to effectively train and support Vietnamese citrus farmers to better manage  
their crops.  
4. Progress to Date  
Implementation Highlights  
Activities for 2006 commenced with a stakeholder meeting held at the Southern  
Regional Plant Protection Centre on Monday 9th January. A total of 18 participants  
attended the meeting including Mr Nguyen Huu Huan, the Deputy Director of the  
Plant Protection Department. Participants and their affiliations are listed in Annex 1.  
The major outcomes from the meeting were:  
¾ The TOT training program would be adjusted to include more practical activities  
¾ The number of FFS to be held in each participating province would be adjusted to  
better reflect the importance of citrus and the area of citrus cultivated  
¾ Teaching materials would include one set of posters of pests and diseases for each  
FFS and a clipboard, monitoring sheets and a hand lens for each participating  
farmer. At the end of the project a field guide of pests and diseases would be  
produced  
Further information about the meeting outcomes are provided in Annex 2.  
The program schedules for each of the 3 TOT training programs were determined.  
Starting dates for the TOT were set as 13th February, 27th February and 13th March  
2006. Details of the topics and presenters are provided in Annex 3. All of the TOT  
training programs were carried out as according to plan and a total of 111 trainers,  
including 74 men and 37 women successfully completed their training. A list of  
names of the participants receiving certificates of attainment and their assessment  
scores are provided in Annex 4.  
From March 21st to 24th Oleg Nicetic visited southern Vietnam and attended meetings  
at the Southern Regional Plant Protection Centre and Vinafruit in Ho Chi Minh city.  
A report on this visit is provided in Annex 5. Major outcomes of the meetings were:  
4
¾ The TOTs were very well organised. Some changes were made to the distribution  
of participants because Quang Nam province has a small area of citrus and their  
needs were met by training in 2005. Binh Dinh province did not send their trainers  
or organise FFS and it is not clear why at this stage.  
¾ Teaching demonstration trials were found to be very effective as a learning tool in  
2005 but feedback from the review workshop indicated that they could be  
simplified. The strategy suggested for 2006 was one based on the flush cycle and  
use of a single application of imidacloprid per flush followed with 3-4 mineral oil  
sprays at a concentration of 0.25%. As part of the TOT, participants worked in  
groups to further refine protocols for this season’s Teaching Demonstration Trials.  
Protocols addressing citrus cultivation, pest management, pruning and nutrition  
were developed for each of the three most important citrus species of pomelo,  
mandarin and orange.  
¾ It was acknowledged that links between Vinafruit and the current project could be  
improved. Mr Chien has been facilitating these links by providing presentations to  
members of Vinafruit cooperatives in the Mekong Delta. In 2006 all participants  
in one FFS in Ben Tre are members of the Vinafruit cooperative.  
In 2005 Can Tho PPSD TOT participants and PPSD staff developed a set of 12  
posters on pests and diseases of citrus in collaboration between extension officers,  
researchers, trainers and farmers. As these posters present important information in a  
visual medium that is easy for farmers to understand and remember, it was suggested  
that a set of posters be made for all FFS to be conducted in 2006. A total of 56 copies  
of the 12 posters were produced at the cost of VND 106,400,000. As funds had not  
been allocated in the budget to print the posters, ACIAR, Communication and Policy  
Secretariat generously contributed 60,800,000 VND, and the Centre for Plant and  
Food Sciences (UWS) 45,600,000 VND. Examples of the posters were submitted to  
CARD PMU in Hanoi on 28th March 2006.  
In April a book entitled “IPM on citrus-Ecological Guide” was published and  
distributed to all participating trainers. The book incorporates chapters on  
establishment and management of citrus orchards, irrigation, fertilization and  
integrated pest, disease and weed management. This publication was received with  
great enthusiasm by many trainers. A copy of the book was provided to the PMU with  
the Milestone 5 Report.  
From 13th -24th June Oleg visited Viet Nam and together with Mr Chien and Dr Hai  
conducted profiling of the sites and villages in 9 of the provinces where FFS are  
currently being held. Because of limited time the FFSs in Tra Vinh province were not  
visited. An additional activity of evaluating each site for compliance with EUREP  
GAP was conducted in order to establish the difference between Vietnamese citrus  
farmer production practices and EUREP GAP requirements. A full report on the  
farmer baseline study and findings is provided in Annex 6. Major findings of the  
study were:  
¾ There are marked differences in the agro-ecological systems and citrus  
growing practices used in the Mekong Delta and the Central Coast region,  
including Nghe An province.  
¾ Farmers need to acquire more skills in recognising pests and diseases and  
connecting these pests and diseases to the phenology of citrus trees.  
5
¾ Farmers predominantly used cheap, older generation pesticides but their  
knowledge about alternative control methods including mineral oil, weaver  
ants and compost and Trichoderma for phytophthora control appears to be  
increasing and these practices are gaining greater acceptance  
¾ There was virtually no compliance with EUREP GAP requirements and it is  
recommended that a simpler model that is appropriate for Vietnamese socio-  
economic and environmental conditions should be developed in order to  
ensure safer citrus products for consumers and reduced environmental impact.  
Capacity Building  
This project continues to enhance the capacity of the PPD to facilitate farmer  
participatory training in citriculture and management of citrus pests and diseases. The  
participatory approach provides a framework within which the pluralism of ideas of  
the trainers can be harnessed, adapted and refined in consultation with farmers in  
order to provide effective solutions for the farmers. In the first year of the project in  
98 trainers undertook training conducted by 10 key scientists, and these trainers  
facilitated 24 FFS in 12 provinces in the Mekong Delta and Central Coast regions of  
Viet Nam. In 2006 an additional 111 trainers undertook training conducted by 11 key  
scientists. Trainers are now facilitating 48 FFS funded by this project and another 4  
funded by the provincial government. FFS will continue until the end of the citrus  
growing season in November.  
As a result of linkages formed between this project and CARD project 052/04VIE  
“Management of phytophthora diseases in Vietnamese horticulture”, Mr Duong Minh  
from Can Tho University conducted training sessions in each of the 3 TOT. In these  
sessions trainers learned about the problems of phytophthora in citrus and methods for  
effectively managing the disease.  
Training Programs  
Training is a major component of this project and a participatory training approach is  
used in both TOT and FFS. As described above 98 trainers attended TOT in 2005, and  
then facilitated FFS in 24 FFS. In 2006 training activities have been scaled up and 111  
trainers attended TOT and 52 FFS are currently underway (Table 1). Further details of  
the TOT training program for 2006 are provided in Annex 3.  
In addition to the FFS funded by the project in 2006, 2 additional FFS are being  
conducted in Tien Giang province and 2 in Vinh Long province (Table 1). These  
additional FFS have been financed by the provincial government.  
Table 1. Distribution of FFS in the Mekong Delta and Central Coast regions and the  
number of participating farmers from each province  
No.  
Province  
No. of FFS No. of FFS  
funded by funded by  
No of  
farmers  
Male  
Female  
CARD  
province participating  
MEKONG  
6
DELTA  
Tien Giang  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
7
7
2
2
6
6
3
5
38  
2
237  
210  
60  
213  
203  
59  
24  
7
1
2
2
8
7
12  
63  
Can Tho  
Hau Giang  
Soc Trang  
Dong Thap  
Vinh Long  
Tra Vinh  
Ben Tre  
60  
58  
180  
240  
90  
150  
1227  
178  
232  
83  
138  
1164  
2
Total  
4
CENTRAL  
COAST  
1
2
3
Nghe An  
Binh Dinh  
Khanh Hoa  
Total  
4
2
4
117  
58  
128  
303  
90  
46  
55  
27  
12  
73  
10  
0
191  
112  
Publicity  
An important finding of the pre-intervention survey was that more than 90% of all  
farmers have a television set in their own home. Every province in Vietnam has a  
local television station and as 70% of the population live in rural areas, the level of  
content relating to agricultural matters is high. As television has high potential impact  
to farmers, television reporters have been invited to all major project events such as  
meetings and the opening and closing of FFS. Numerous television reports about the  
project were broadcast in 2006, and details of reports broadcast on Tien Giang TV  
(TGTV) and Vinh Long TV (VLTV) are provided in table 2.  
Table 2. Details of television programs reporting on project activities from the  
commencement of FFS until June 2006.  
Topic  
Program title Program Broadcast TV  
length  
(mins)  
date  
channel  
The second year of CARD  
Citrus IPM project and prospect Horticultural  
for future project in GAP  
News in  
15  
17/04/06  
Tien  
Giang  
TV  
Practices  
Natural enemies and reduced  
pesticide use  
90  
11/06/06  
12/06/06  
Vinh  
Long  
TV  
How to  
Become Richer  
Farmer  
Fertilizer application  
technologies at citrus flowering  
stage  
30  
Tien  
Giang  
TV  
Topics in  
Horticulture  
7
Project Management  
The project has continued to be very well managed in terms of on time and on budget  
achievement of training objectives. The Vietnamese partners are highly committed at  
all levels of the Plant Protection Department. Activities commenced for 2006 with a  
stakeholder meeting which was opened and chaired by Mr Nguyen Huu Huan, Deputy  
Director of the Plant Protection Department. The meeting was highly effective with  
all major planning decisions for the year agreed on. Dr Debbie Rae and Oleg Nicetic  
both attended the meeting without cost to the project, because travel was combined  
with other projects.  
The Vietnamese Project Team Leader continued to demonstrate exceptional project  
management skills and has remained intimately involved in all aspects of the project  
including facilitation of 3 TOTs as well as presenting part of the course. In June 2006  
Mr Chien spent 2 weeks travelling together with Dr Hai and Oleg Nicetic to all  
participating provinces in order to conduct a baseline survey of farmer practices and  
determine compliance with Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) principles. Mr Chien  
has also continued to initiate activities outside the original scope of the project  
including sponsorship for provision of materials to be used in teaching demonstration  
trials.  
Mr Huan organised editing and printing of the book “Ecological Management of  
Citrus” and has facilitated the writing of another book, which will be a field guide for  
farmers and trainers.  
Saigon Plant Protection Company (SPPC) is participating very actively in the FFS  
program this year and have donated mineral oil for all the schools and published  
10,000 leaflets for farmers that outline how to use mineral oil in the citrus IPM  
program.  
5. Report on Cross-Cutting Issues  
Environment  
The focus of FFS is to increase the farmers understanding of the ecosystem and the  
impact of human influences on it. This approach has the potential to reduce the  
detrimental impacts of human activities on the environment. Farmers in the Mekong  
Delta are reporting that IPM strategies they learned in FFS and have adopted on their  
own farms have made it possible for them to raise fish in the canals between the citrus  
trees. This is clear evidence of improved ecosystem health.  
Gender and Social Issues  
In the training of trainers 69 males and 29 females were trained in 2005 and 74 males  
and 37 females were trained in 2006. The proportion of male and female trainers is  
reflective of the overall gender balance of PPD trainers. At the FFS level women were  
strongly encouraged to participate, but participation by women depends on the  
8
household partitioning of duties, which varies considerably between provinces and  
regions. For example in Phu Son village in Ben Tre province all FFS participant were  
men, whereas in Vinh Thanh village in Khan Hoa province 80% of FFS participants  
were women.  
Representatives from NGOs are invited to project planning meetings and kept  
informed about project activities.  
6. Implementation Issues  
Issues and Constraints  
No new issues or constraints arose during the first 6 months of 2006. The major issue  
previously identified is the need for the Australian Organisation to forward funds to  
Vietnam for training activities, before funds have been received from the funding  
organisation because of the requirement to complete milestones before payments can  
be made. The major constraint identified previously is the limited local resources  
available to Vietnamese scientists, researchers and trainers to allow travel outside the  
local region in order to seek or provide expertise and exchange information.  
Options  
All changes to TOT curricula and the way FFSs are conducted that were suggested at  
the review workshops in November 2005 and at the stakeholder meeting in January  
2006 were successfully implemented.  
7. Conclusion  
High levels of enthusiasm for this project, efficient planning, open communication  
between project personnel and sustained efforts have resulted in all components of the  
project logframe for the first 6 months of 2006 being completed.  
List of Annexes  
Annex 1. Participant list for the stakeholder meeting held at the Southern Regional  
Plant Protection Centre on Monday 9th January 2006.  
Annex 2. Outcomes from the stakeholder meeting held at the Southern Regional Plant  
Protection Centre on Monday 9th January 2006.  
Annex 3. Training program and curriculum for 2006.  
Annex 4.  
9
Annex 5. Report on a visit to the Southern Regional Plant Protection Centre, My Tho  
and Vinafruit, Ho Chi Minh City from 21st to 24th March 2006 by Oleg Nicetic.  
Annex 6. Farmer practice baseline study 2006.  
Annex 1. Participant list for the stakeholder meeting held at the Southern  
Regional Plant Protection Centre on Monday 9th January 2006  
No.  
1
Name  
Organization/Institution  
Sex  
F
Dr. Debbie Rae  
WSU  
WSU  
2
Mr. Oleg Nicetic  
M
M
M
M
F
3
Mr. Nguyen Huu Huan  
Mr. Ho Van Chien  
Dr. Trac Khuong Lai  
Dr. Nguyen Thi Thu Cuc  
Dr. Tran Van Hai  
PPD  
4
SRPPC  
5
SOFRI  
6
CTU  
7
CTU  
M
M
M
8
Mr. Duong Minh  
CTU  
9
Mr. Pham Van Quynh  
Department of Agriculture and Rural  
Development In Can Tho City  
Farmer association of Vinh Long  
Province  
10  
11  
Mss. Nguyen Thi Dao  
Mr. Le Huu Hai  
F
Department of Agriculture and Rural  
Development In Cai Lay District-  
Tien Giang Prov.  
Sub-DPP in Tien Giang Prov.  
Farmer Association  
Women Association  
Sai Gon Pesticide Commpany  
M
12  
13  
14  
15  
Mr. Pham Van Chien  
Mr. Nguyen Van Tu  
Mss. Nguyen Thi Bay  
Mss. Nguyen Thi Ngoc  
Thuy  
M
M
F
F
16  
17  
18  
Dr. Bui Van Kiep  
Mss. Pham Thi Cuc  
Mr. Nguyen Van Minh  
Bayer Crop Science Company  
Lan Anh Company  
M
F
Tien Giang TV Station  
M
10  
Annex 2. Outcomes from the stakeholder meeting held at the Southern Regional  
Plant Protection Centre on Monday 9th January 2006  
1. Changes to the training program for 2006  
Participants agreed that the TOT program should include more practical exercises and  
Mr Chien suggested that presenters give lectures in the morning and have practical  
application in the field. A citrus orchard near to the Southern Regional Plant  
Protection Centre will be used for practical exercises. A new section on using  
Trichoderma and composting to improve the resistance of citrus trees to phytophthora  
will be presented by Mr Duong Minh.  
2. Number of trainers and FFS from each province  
Changes were made in the number of FFS to be held in each participating province to  
better reflect the importance of citrus and the area of citrus cultivated. The modified  
program is shown in Table 1.  
Table 1. Number of TOT participants and FFS in each province  
No.  
Province/City  
No. of TOT  
participants  
No.  
from  
NGOs  
No.  
FFS  
Remark  
MEKONG DELTA  
Tien Giang  
Can Tho  
Hau Giang  
Soc Trang  
Dong Thap  
Vinh Long  
Tra Vinh  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
12  
12  
5
3
3
0
0
3
3
0
3
15  
6
6
2
2
6
6
3
5
36  
5
12  
12  
5
12  
75  
Ben Tre  
Total  
CENTRAL COAST  
Nghe An  
Binh Dinh  
Khanh Hoa  
Total  
1
2
3
8
8
8
2
2
2
6
4
4
4
24  
12  
Note: NGO: Non-Government Organizations (such as Farmer Association, Women  
Association, Horticultural Association, VACVINA, Private Pesticide Dealers)  
3. Teaching materials for the farmers  
During the first year of Citrus FFS, trainers developed many different resource  
materials for the farmers. The most outstanding of these was a series of posters  
printed on waterproof material developed by Can Tho Plant Protection Sub  
11  
Department. A range of pest and disease monitoring sheets were also developed in  
different locations. At the review workshops held in November 2005 it was decided to  
simplify and standardise monitoring sheets across all FFS for 2006. Also at the  
workshops there were many requests for simple and practical field guide to pests and  
diseases with lots of pictures.  
At the meeting 3 major decisions were made about teaching materials:  
1. Copies of the posters made by Can Tho Plant Protection Sub Department will  
be made for all FFS. The cost will be around $A5,000 and this will be paid by  
UWS. One additional poster on the phenological phases of citrus growth  
would be very useful for the farmers.  
2. Monitoring sheets, clip boards and hand lenses will be provided to all farmers  
at the start of each FFS. The field monitoring sheets need to be simple and  
easy for the farmers to use. Mr Chien will fund these and arrange delivery to  
each FFS.  
3. At the end of the project a field-guide (“notebook”) will be produced for use  
by farmers. The principal author will be Dr Nguyen Thi Thu Cuc, with co-  
authors Dr Tran Van Hai, Ho Van Chien and Oleg Nicetic. Funds will be  
provided from PPD, from money previously allocated to printing books from  
the first CARD project. After the field-guide is printed it will be distributed to  
every participant.  
4. Field demonstration trials and study tours  
In 2006 every FFS wants to have a demonstration field trial with IPM and grower  
practice treatments. However, within the project budget there is no money to buy  
pesticides necessary to conduct the trials. Farmers themselves can provide materials  
for the farmer practice treatment, but for the IPM treatment materials need to be  
sourced from the pesticide companies. Mr Chien will contact the companies to seek  
their support.  
In 2005 study tours were funded by UWS but in 2006 no further funds are available.  
Mr Huan suggested that support should be sought from the local government  
extension budget. Mr Huan and Mr Chien will look into this.  
12  
Annex 3. Training program and curriculum for 2006.  
1st TOT”- Training content of “TOT” IPM on Citrus  
Content Trainer Date  
Day No  
Office  
1
Variety and culture method MSc. Nguyen  
Feb. 13  
SOFRI  
on Citrus plant Huu Thoai  
2
3
Nutrient demand of Citrus  
plant  
Identify, damage symptom  
Dr. Nguyen Bao  
Toan  
Dr. Nguyen Thi  
Thu Cuc  
Feb. 14  
Cantho  
University  
Cantho  
Morning  
Feb. 15  
Morning of the main pests on Citrus  
orchard. Practice on Citrus  
orchard  
University  
Afternoon Introduction to IPM on  
Citrus  
Dr. Nguyen Thi  
Thu Cuc  
MSc. Duong  
Minh  
Afternoon Feb. Cantho  
15 and Feb. 16  
Morning  
University  
Cantho  
4
Soil born disease and  
Morning biological control.  
Method - making compost  
Feb. 17  
University  
Afternoon Using pesticide in IPM on  
Dr. Tran Van Hai Afternoon Feb. Cantho  
Citrus  
17  
University  
5
Methods for spraying PSO  
Morning and pruning Citrus plant.  
MSc. Nguyen  
Huu Thoai  
Morning  
Feb. 18  
SOFRI  
SRPPC  
Practice on Citrus orchard. BSc. Le Quoc  
Cuong  
Afternoon PSO and technical spraying BSc. LE Quoc  
Afternoon Feb. SRPPC  
18  
on Citrus plant  
Cuong  
6
Insects and theirs natural  
enemies  
MSc. Ho Van  
Chien  
Feb. 19  
SRPPC  
7
Management “Greening”  
Dr. Nguyen Van  
Hoa  
Morning  
Feb. 20  
SOFRI  
Morning and “Tristeza” diseases on  
Citrus plant  
Afternoon Practice “Greening Test-  
Kit”. Method - rapid  
Dr. Nguyen Van  
Hoa  
Afternoon Feb. SOFRI  
20  
diagnosis Greening disease  
8
9
Technical stored post-  
harvest  
Method survey and analysis MSc. Le Van  
MSc. Lam Thi  
My Nuong  
Feb. 21  
Feb. 22  
SRPPC  
SRPPC  
effect of training “IPM on  
Citrus” by KAP using SPSS  
Discussion and design  
Thiet  
10  
Group action  
Morning  
Feb. 23  
Morning protocol for IPM on special  
Citrus plant  
Afternoon Discussion and design  
Group action and Afternoon Feb.  
protocol for IPM on special trainer  
23  
Citrus plant (continue) and  
test at the end of course  
11  
Presentation protocols and  
general discussion  
– Closing  
Trainers.  
Feb. 24  
1
2nd TOT”- Training content of “TOT” IPM on Citrus  
Content Trainer Date  
Day No  
Office  
1
Variety and culture method MSc. Nguyen Feb. 27  
SOFRI  
on Citrus plant  
Nutrient demand of Citrus  
plant  
Huu Thoai  
Dr. Nguyen Bao  
Toan  
2
3
Feb. 28  
Cantho  
University  
Cantho  
Identify, damage symptoms Dr. Nguyen Thi  
Morning  
Morning of the main pests on Citrus  
orchard. Practice on Citrus  
orchard.  
Thu Cuc  
March 01  
University  
Afternoon Introduction IPM on Citrus Dr. Nguyen Thi  
Afternoon  
March01 and  
March 02  
Morning  
Cantho  
University  
Thu Cuc  
4
Soil born disease and  
Morning biological control.  
Method - making compost  
MSc. Duong  
Minh  
Cantho  
University  
March 03  
Afternoon Using pesticide in IPM on  
Dr. Tran Van Hai Afternoon  
March 03  
Cantho  
University  
SOFRI  
Citrus  
5
Methods for spraying PSO  
MSc. Nguyen  
Huu Thoai  
Morning  
March 04  
Morning and pruning Citrus plant.  
SRPPC  
Practice on Citrus orchard BSc. Le Quoc  
Cuong  
Afternoon PSO and technical spraying BSc. LE Quoc  
Afternoon  
March 04  
March 05  
SRPPC  
SRPPC  
SOFRI  
on Citrus plant  
Cuong  
6
Insects and theirs natural  
enemies  
MSc. Ho Van  
Chien  
7
Management “Greening”  
Dr. Nguyen Van  
Hoa  
Morning  
March 06  
Morning and “Tristeza” diseases on  
Citrus plant  
Afternoon Practice “Greening Test-  
Kit”. Method - rapid  
Dr. Nguyen Van  
Hoa  
Afternoon  
March 06  
SOFRI  
diagnosis Greening disease  
8
9
Technical stored post-  
harvest  
Method survey and analysis MSc. Le Van  
MSc. Lam Thi  
My Nuong  
March 07  
March 08  
SRPPC  
SRPPC  
effect of training “IPM on  
Citrus” by KAP and using  
SPSS software.  
Thiet  
10  
Discussion and design  
Group action  
Morning  
Morning protocol for IPM on special  
Citrus plant  
March 09  
Afternoon Discussion and design  
Group action and Afternoon  
protocol for IPM on special trainers  
Citrus plant (continue) and  
test at the end of course  
March 09  
March 10  
11  
Presentation protocols and  
general discussion  
– Closing  
Trainers.  
2
3th TOT”- Training content of “TOT” IPM on Citrus  
Content Trainer Date  
Day No  
Office  
1
Variety and culture method MSc. Nguyen March13  
SOFRI  
on Citrus plant  
Nutrient demand of Citrus  
plant  
Huu Thoai  
Dr. Nguyen Bao  
Toan  
2
3
March14  
Cantho  
University  
Cantho  
Identify, damage symptom  
Dr. Nguyen Thi  
Thu Cuc  
Morning  
March15  
Morning of the main pests on Citrus  
orchard Practice on Citrus  
orchard.  
University  
Afternoon Introduction IPM on Citrus Dr. Nguyen Thi  
Afternoon  
March 15  
March 16  
Morning  
March 17  
Cantho  
University  
Thu Cuc  
4
Soil born disease and  
Morning biological control.  
Method - making compost  
MSc. Duong  
Minh  
Cantho  
University  
Afternoon Using pesticide in IPM on  
Dr. Tran Van Hai Afternoon  
March 17  
Cantho  
University  
SOFRI  
Citrus  
5
Methods for spraying PSO  
MSc. Nguyen  
Huu Thoai  
Morning  
March 18  
Morning and pruning Citrus plant.  
SRPPC  
Practice on Citrus orchard BSc. Le Quoc  
Cuong  
Afternoon PSO and technical spraying BSc. LE Quoc  
Afternoon  
March 18  
March 19  
SRPPC  
SRPPC  
SOFRI  
on Citrus plant  
Cuong  
6
Insects and theirs natural  
enemies  
MSc. Ho Van  
Chien  
7
Management “Greening”  
Dr. Nguyen Van  
Hoa  
Morning  
March 20  
Morning and “Tristeza” diseases on  
Citrus plant  
Afternoon Practice “Greening Test-  
Kit”. Method - rapid  
Dr. Nguyen Van  
Hoa  
Afternoon  
March 20  
SOFRI  
diagnosis Greening disease  
8
9
Technical stored post-  
harvest  
Method survey and analysis MSc. Le Van  
MSc. Lam Thi  
My Nuong  
March 21  
March 22  
SRPPC  
SRPPC  
effect of training “IPM on  
Citrus” by KAP and using  
SPSS software for windows.  
Discussion and design  
Thiet  
10  
Group action  
Morning March  
23  
Morning protocol for IPM on special  
Citrus plant  
Afternoon Discussion and design  
Group action and Afternoon  
protocol for IPM on special trainer  
Citrus plant (continue) and  
test at the end of course  
March 23  
March 24  
11  
Presentation protocols and  
general discussion  
– Closing  
Trainers.  
3
Annex 5. Report on a visit to the Southern Regional Plant Protection Centre, My  
Tho and Vinafruit, Ho Chi Minh City from 21st to 24th March 2006 by Oleg  
Nicetic  
1. TOT  
Oleg participated in the last day of the third very well organised TOT training  
program at the Southern Regional Plant Protection Centre (SRPPC). Three TOTs  
were organized: 1st TOT 13/02/ to 24/02/06; 2nd TOT 27/02 to 10/03/06 and 3rd TOT  
13/03/ to 23/03/06. A total of 113 trainers were trained from 10 provinces, 8 from  
Mekong Delta and 2 from Central Coast. At the stakeholders meeting in January 2006  
it was decided that this year no FFS would be held in Quang Nam Province because it  
has a very small area of citrus and training conducted last year sufficiently met the  
needs of that province. Unfortunately no new trainers were recruited from Binh Dinh  
province. Mr Chien made many attempts to talk with the director of the provincial  
PPSD but was not successful. However, effort will be made to organise FFSs in that  
province with trainers trained in 2005.  
This year the revised training curriculum that incorporated experience and feedback  
from the trainers last year was used in the TOT (See Annex 3). A better balance  
between the theoretical and practical components was achieved. This year participants  
of TOT developed protocols for this seasons Teaching Demonstration Trials.  
Participants were divided into three groups and each group developed protocol for one  
of three targeted citrus species, pomelo, mandarin and orange. Protocols addressed not  
only pest management but also citrus cultivation, pruning and nutrition. Oleg  
participated in the session when groups presented PowerPoint presentations of the  
protocols they had developed. He was impressed with the quality of presentation and  
vivid and heated discussion between the TOT participants. The participatory method  
of teaching used during the TOT course obviously produced results. In the closing  
speech Oleg reinforced the importance of trainers working with farmers to further  
improve the IPM strategies that will be used this year in FFSs teaching demonstration  
trials and that the IPM protocol and action threshold levels provided form a  
framework that they can change and adapt to their own situation.  
Certificates of attainment were awarded to all participants after they successfully  
passed assessment process.  
2. Teaching demonstration trials  
The concept of Teaching Demonstration Trials (TDT) was very successful last year  
with very positive feedback from trainers and farmers.  
A revised protocol for the teaching demonstration trials in 2006 was discussed at the  
meeting with Mr Chien, Dr Hai (CTU) and Dr Cuc (CTU) on 22/03/06. It was agreed  
that this year the protocol would be simplified and only one strategy that was drafted  
from last year experience and trainers’ feedback at the Project Review Workshops  
will be put forward to trainers. The strategy is based on the flush cycle and use of a  
single application of imidacloprid per flush followed with 3-4 mineral oil sprays at  
concentration of 0.25%. Green ants will be nurtured in IPM plots. Trials will be  
continuously monitored and if any monitored pest reaches the action threshold  
participants of FFS can apply one of the suggested pesticides. The thresholds  
suggested are very low and they are based on farmers’ perception rather than on real  
economic damage. Therefore, trainers are encouraged to use their own judgment and  
4
work with farmers to determine the best timing for the pesticide sprays which may  
occur when pest levels are about the preliminary action thresholds. However no  
thresholds lower than those suggested should be used. Special care should be taken to  
record pesticides applied to Farmer Practice plot within the TDT. Accurate record  
keeping of pesticides and fertilisers used is a very important part of the FFS  
curriculum and should be followed by trainers and be applied not only at FFS  
teaching plots but also in the farmers’ own orchards.  
All FFSs will be provided with imidacloprid (Confidor) donated by Bayer and SK  
EnSpray 99 donated by Saigon Plant Protection Company.  
3. TOT and FFS training material  
The manual for training of trainers was developed in 2005 and accepted by CARD  
PMU. However that was only the first step in providing training materials to trainers  
and farmers. The Vietnamese project team with help from Oleg and Debbie prepared  
a manuscript for a book that will be distributed to all trainers that successfully  
completed training during 2005 and 2006. Oleg met with Mr Nguyen Huu Huan,  
Deputy Director General of Plant Protection Department in his office in Ho Chi Minh  
City and discussed the manuscript and publishing time frame.  
The manuscript is in the process of final editing and it should be printed by the end of  
April 2006. The book covers citrus production including cultivation, pruning,  
nutrition, pests, diseases and weeds. There is also a chapter on use of mineral oil that  
is jointly authored by Dr Tran Van Hai, Ms Nguyen Ngoc Thuy, Mr Oleg Nicetic and  
Dr Debbie Rae. That chapter still needs major corrections. Corrections were discussed  
at the meeting with Dr Hai on 22/03/06 and Oleg and Debbie submitted text of  
recommendations for use of oil to Dr Hai who will translate to Vietnamese and  
incorporate into the revised book chapter. Dr Hai will submit corrected text to Mr  
Huan by the end of the month.  
At the meeting with Mr Huan publishing a practical field guide for citrus pest and  
diseases that is intended for the farmers was also discussed. This book should be  
printed by the end of November and distributed to the farmers that participated in  
FFSs and were awarded certificates of attainment over the 2 years of the current  
project. It was agreed that about 2000 copies of the book will be printed and it will  
have about 100 pages. Both books will be printed from residual funds from the 2002  
pilot CARD project.  
Mr Huan also pointed out that he can provide funds for printing yet another book that  
will cover the topic of methodology and curriculum of FFS.  
Mr Huan expressed his satisfaction and approval with the current CARD project and  
show great interest in the proposal of the new CARD project that will use IPM as a  
vehicle for introduction of GAP to citrus farmers.  
At the meeting in SRPPC on 23/03/06 with Mr Chien, Dr Hai (CTU) and Dr Cuc  
(CTU) the content of the Field Guide for Citrus Pests and Diseases was discussed. Dr  
Cuc will be the principal author and she will write the part about pests. Dr Hai will  
write about diseases. Oleg will be consulted when it comes to pest and disease  
control. Oleg and Debbie will write text where mineral oil will be used for control of  
pests or diseases.  
The field guidebook will be small in size so that it can fit in the pocket. Each pest and  
disease will be presented on 2 pages, with text on the first page and pictures on the  
second. Text will be organised in 5 sections: 1. Very short description of the  
5
pest/disease, 2. Description of damage, 3. Monitoring and action threshold, 4. Natural  
enemies, 5. Control. Picture of the pest/disease, picture of damage caused by the  
pest/symptom of disease and picture of the natural enemy will be shown.  
Time frame for the writing of the guidebook is very short. It was agreed that the  
manuscript should be ready in October for the book to be printed in November and  
distributed by the end of the project.  
It was also agreed that by Oleg’s next visit in June the manuscript for 3 pests  
(leafminer, psylla and aphids) and 3 diseases (canker, phytophthora and fusarium) will  
be completed. Also by that time a complete list of pests and diseases that will be  
included in the book will be finalised. At the meeting in June the manuscript for 3  
pests and diseases will be analysed, edited, corrected and shaped so that the text about  
all other pests and diseases can be written using the same format.  
For the FFSs that will be conducted this year two sets of educational posters were  
produced on water proof plastic materials. The first set of 8 posters presents insect and  
mite pests of citrus and the second set of 4 posters presents major diseases of citrus. A  
total of 56 copies of the 12 posters were produced at the cost of VND 106,400,000.  
There were no funds for printing posters in the current project budget so funds were  
obtained from ACIAR, Communication and Policy Secretariat (60,800,000 VND) and  
from Centre for Plant and Food Sciences (UWS) (45,600,000 VND). Can Tho PPSD  
TOT participants and other staff of PPSD took the initiative to create these posters  
themselves. The posters are one more demonstration of the success of the method of  
participatory and experiential learning applied in this CARD project.  
Sheets for recording presence of pests, diseases and natural enemies for use by all  
participating farmers in their own orchards were developed and printed. Each school  
will be provided with hand lenses.  
4. Visit to FFS 11th – 23th June  
Oleg will visit Viet Nam from 11th -23th June. During the first week he will visit FFS  
in the Mekong Delta region and during the second week he will visit FFS in the  
Central coast region. The main aim of the visit is to conduct profiling of each of the  
sites and villages where the FFS will be held in a similar manner to that conducted  
last year. In addition to the profiling of each site, Oleg will also evaluate each site for  
compliance with EurepGAP requirement. The purpose of this additional study is to  
establish how wide the gap between Vietnamese citrus farmer production practices  
and EurepGAP requirements is. This data will be also used to prepare an application  
for a new CARD project with a major objective of introducing Good Agricultural  
Practice (GAP) to citrus farmers.  
Oleg will also explore with farmers and trainers the optimum spray application  
method for each TDT with the sprayers available at the FFS site. The spray equipment  
will be calibrated, the volume of spray will be determined and different spraying  
techniques will be demonstrated. Each of the trial sites will be mapped and their  
position recorded using GPS. During the visits the FFS participants will be  
encouraged to discuss their ideas and concerns.  
All 8 provinces in Mekong delta will be visited as well as Khanh Hoa province on the  
Central Coast and Nghe An in the north. SRPPC will provide a car for the visit to  
Mekong delta provinces and UWS will cover airfare and accommodation costs for 1  
personnel from SRPPC and 1 personnel from Can Tho University to visit the Centre  
6
and North of Viet Nam with Oleg. Airfare will cover flights from Ho Chi Minh City  
to Vinh, Hanoi to Nha Trang and Nha Trang to Ho Chi Minh City.  
5. Proposal for new project  
All partners in current CARD project agreed that they would like to create and take  
part in the next CARD project. At the meeting with Mr Chien, Dr Hai (CTU), Dr Cuc  
(CTU) and Dr Hoa (SOFRI) it was concluded that current project has really started  
the process of implementation of IPM in Mekong Delta and that now when we have  
trained enough people we should continue to provide them with the chance to put  
their knowledge into action. The usefulness of the current project is also confirmed by  
the willingness of the provincial PPSD to invest their own money and increase  
number of FFS in their provinces so they can meet demands of the farmers. If  
approved, the new project will concentrate only on 4 of the most advanced citrus  
production provinces in Mekong delta. Proposed project will provide additional  
training to the best trainers from the current project and promote them into master  
trainers. Also it will train many new trainers not only from PPSD but also from other  
NGOs like Vinafruit. The number of trained extension officers and farmers will reach  
a critical number that will allow area wide Integrated Pest Management. All  
participants at the meeting agreed that the project would provide the opportunity for  
introduction of GAP principles in citrus production.  
6. Visit toVinaFruit  
Oleg visited VinaFruit at Ho Chi Minh City on 24/03/06 and had a meeting with the  
President of the association Dr Vo Mai. He informed her about the progress of the  
current CARD project and they both agreed that participation of VinaFruit members  
in the current project could be higher. Only about 10% of trainers in TOT come from  
the organisation and a slightly higher proportion of farmer members of the association  
participated in FFSs. However Mr Chien participated in VinaFruit activities and  
presented topics on safe use of pesticide on fruit.  
VinaFruit concentrates its activities in 7 provinces in Mekong delta (all part of current  
CARD project). Oleg and Dr Vo Mai agreed that future efforts should be concentrated  
and more resources put in fewer more developed production areas to elevate them to a  
production standard that can compete with the other countries in the region. A major  
activity of VinaFruit is the introduction of GAP but Dr Vo Mai pointed out that  
production practices in Viet Nam are far from the standards prescribed by EurepGAP.  
She informed Oleg about the process of development of Asian GAP and that it could  
be completed by the end of the year. Dr Vo Mai fully agreed with Oleg that IPM is a  
core of GAP and that current CARD project is already preparing farmers for  
introduction of GAP. VinaFruit has 5 cooperatives in citrus production; 3  
cooperatives producing pomelo in Ben Tre, Tien Giang and Vinh Long provinces, 1  
cooperative producing oranges in Vinh Long province and 1 cooperative producing  
mandarins in Dong Thap province. Each cooperative comprises of about 100 farmers.  
In each cooperative there is technical group of 5 to 7 members that is responsible for  
coordination of activities and introduction of new technologies. Oleg introduced the  
concept of the proposed new CARD project and Dr Vo Mai will give her comments.  
However both Oleg and Dr Vo Mai agreed that if new project is approved a member  
of each cooperative technical group will be trained in TOT and each cooperative will  
then run FFSs.  
7
Annex 6.  
Farmer practice baseline study 2006  
From 13th to 24th June 2006 Oleg Nicetic, Ho Van Chien and Dr Tran Van Hai visited  
7 FFS in the Mekong Delta, one in Khan Hoa province and 2 in Nghe An province  
(Table 1). At each location the same data collection procedure was used as in 2005,  
with the addition of data collection about compliance with GAP. Interviews were  
conducted with the farmers who hosted the FFS demonstration experiments, other  
farmers participating in the FFS, and the owners/managers of local agricultural  
chemical shops. Information about compliance with GAP was obtained by  
interviewing the directors of PPSD together with trainers involved in citrus IPM  
training. Visual checks were also made at the farms visited and further questions  
directed to participating farmers.  
Information collected from these interviews adds to the database collected in 2005  
and complements detailed information collected from each of the participating  
farmers in pre- and post intervention surveys. The major aims of these interviews  
were to:  
¾ obtain an overview of current citriculture practices throughout the study area  
¾ document spray application practices and pesticide usage  
¾ determine the major gaps in the knowledge of farmers so that these topics can  
be included in the FFS.  
¾ determine the current level of compliance with GAP  
Findings  
Dominant citrus species and orchard layout  
There were no changes in dominant citrus species (Table 1) or in orchard layout  
(Table 2) from the 2005 survey so these 2 topics will not be further discussed in this  
report.  
Dominant pests and diseases  
As was found in the 2005 survey, farmers interviewed in 2006 have great difficulty  
identifying pests and diseases, and in many cases are unable to separate damage  
caused by pests or diseases. In most cases the farmers intervene when it is too late to  
provide effective control of the causal agent. A typical example is leafminer. Farmers  
also apply pesticides unnecessarily to visible pests that do not cause economic  
damage, such as with aphids.  
Overall in the Mekong Delta leafminer and mites were nominated as the major  
problems in 2006 with mealybugs on roots appearing to be less of a problem than in  
8
2005 (Table 3). The root mealybug remains unidentified and there has been no  
objective evaluation of damage caused by this pest. Lower concern about mealybug  
this year indicates that it may not be a serious pest. High levels of concern in 2005  
may be due to it being a new phenomenon then. Further investigations as to the  
importance of this pest are needed before making any firm conclusions. Other major  
pests nominated by farmers include psylla and scales (Table 3). Similar farmer  
misconceptions about practices that could contribute to spread of huanglongbing were  
found in 2005 to 2006. Farmer responses indicate sprays for psylla and leafminer are  
applied too late after the leafminer damage becomes visible allowing development of  
leafminer and transmission of huanglongbing. Most farmers use marcotted planting  
material. Previously much of this material was of unknown origin, purchased from  
unauthorised salespeople selling from boats, but farmers indicated that more recently  
they are either marcotting trees themselves or purchasing from neighbours to ensure  
that planting material was taken from healthy vigorous trees without symptoms of  
disease. Reported problems with mites could be partly induced by the frequent use of  
synthetic pyrethroids reported last year. Use of synthetic pyrethroids seems to be less  
in this years survey compared to 2005. Farmers identified phytophthora as the major  
disease and they seem to be much more aware of the disease than in the 2005 survey.  
Increased awareness could be partly the result of activities of our project and CARD  
052/04 VIE project.  
At Kanh Hoa province in the Central Coast leafminer and mites were also identified  
as the major problems.  
In Nghe An province mites and phytophthora were considered the major problems by  
interviewed farmers, but huanglongbing was observed to be more serious and  
widespread than in any other province visited. Farmers are aware that psylla transmit  
huanglongbing, and the use of disease free material is greater than in southern  
Vietnam, but there is a general misconception that controlling psylla on the spring  
flush (flush that bears the fruit in the following autumn) is sufficient. In order to  
prevent transmission of huanglongbing, psylla need to be controlled year round on all  
flushes. This point will be emphasised in the training during the second year of the  
project.  
Pesticides were generally not overused in the regions and provinces visited even  
though number of sprays recorded in survey was higher than the number of sprays  
recorded last year. However, timing of spraying and the type of pesticide used needs  
to be optimised. Farmers predominantly used cheap, older generation pesticides  
(Table 3). However, use of thiamethoxam and imidacloprid seems to be slightly  
increased and use of synthetic pyrethroids decreased in comparison to last year’s  
survey. Use of mineral oil is still low but it is rising most likely due to marketing  
efforts of SPPC and support of PPD and our project. The main reason for low uptake  
of the use of oil is phytotoxicity experienced by many growers in the past. A very  
phytotoxicity conscious approach is being taken in current recommendations  
promoted by SPPC, which include only 2 low concentration oil sprays per major flush  
per year. If farmers follow these recommendations and no phytotoxicity is observed  
then their perceptions about oil should change during the current season. A much  
more difficult problem to address is the efficacy of oil, which is often not sufficient  
due to poor application methods. This baseline study revealed that except for Dong  
Thap and Nghe An province, knapsack sprayers are used by the vast majority of  
9
farmers (Table 3). Not only do the vast majority of farmers use knapsack sprayers but  
most of the knapsacks used are of very poor quality and not able to produce adequate  
pressure to achieve necessary liquid dispersal for good coverage of the leaves.  
Mineral oil will not be able to be used to its full potential until most farmers have  
sprayers that can deliver adequate pressure. However, oil can still form an important  
part of a program that will include a range of other pesticide (imidicloprid or  
thiamethoxam) and biological control methods. Use of weaver ants (Oecophylla  
smargdina) as a biological control agent is widespread in Mekong delta and this  
practice was strongly encouraged by our project. Use of compost and Trichoderma for  
phytophthora control showed good acceptance by farmers.  
Compliance with GAP principles  
Development and implementation of good agricultural practice (GAP) is a very  
important next step for the Vietnamese citrus industry to take. Many activities have  
been undertaken in the past few years to introduce the concept of GAP to farmers of  
various horticultural crops particularly in the Mekong delta. Development of GAP for  
dragonfruit is part of CARD activities and SOFRI and Vinafruit are championing the  
concept in many other fruit crops including citrus. In the 2006 baseline surveys we  
evaluated each site for compliance with EUREP GAP requirements. We also  
interviewed directors of PPSD and trainers about their perceptions of GAP and  
recorded their estimates of compliance with the EUREP GAP principles in their  
province (Table 4). The purpose of this additional study was to establish how wide the  
gap is between Vietnamese citrus farmer production practices and EEREP GAP  
requirements.  
All PPSD directors and trainers were asked if they are aware of the GAP concept and  
what the main purpose and core components of GAP are.  
All interviewees were aware of the term GAP but none were aware that GAP is a  
retail and consumer driven concept to deliver safe food to retail outlets with minimum  
environmental impact in production. They were not aware of traceability of product  
and record keeping as core concepts of GAP. The responses for what is a core  
component of GAP vary from province to province and answers are given below (for  
protection of anonymity of respondents the name of provinces are not shown):  
1. Certification of and production of disease free planting material.  
2. Managing of huanglongbing.  
3. Training of farmers.  
4. Protocol for production on large area that required cooperation between farmers.  
5. Organizing farmer groups to implement better production practice.  
6. Training of farmers, demonstration of new techniques and introduction of new  
varieties.  
7. Training, use of organic fertilizers and improved marketing.  
8. Knowledge and education, investment and marketing.  
When asked to estimate the percentage of farmers that comply with the following  
main components of GAP: traceability, record keeping, variety and rootstock origin,  
site history and site management, soil and substrate management, post harvest  
10  
treatment, worker health and environmental management, all interviewees agreed that  
there is no compliance at all. Most of the farmers use organic fertilizers so they partly  
comply with GAP requirements for fertilizer use but the compliance with requirement  
for use of clean irrigation water as specified by EURAP GAP is not possible with the  
sewage system present in the Delta.  
Interviewees were asked in detail about compliance with crop protection requirements  
of EUREP GAP and the estimated percentages of compliance for each sub-  
requirement are presented in Table 4. Very high compliance is estimated for  
application of only officially registered pesticide and for compliance with pre-harvest  
interval. However PPSD staff do not have a full understanding of the GAP  
requirement for a registered product. The GAP requirement for a registered pesticide  
is that the pesticide is specifically registered for the targeted crop (citrus in our case)  
while PPD staff described a registered product as a pesticide registered for any crop in  
Vietnam that has not been placed on the list of banned pesticides. Consequently if no  
specific pre-harvest interval was set for citrus (because the product was not registered  
for citrus) then no compliance with this requirement is possible. Compliance with the  
pre-harvest interval requirement is also in many cases because of the practice of  
continuous harvesting throughout the year. Compliance with the requirement for  
training in pesticide use is relatively high but compliance with requirement for use of  
safety gear and training in safe pesticide use is very low. There are no pesticide  
residues checks or appropriate pesticide storage and disposal facilities or procedures.  
However we observed that quantities of pesticides kept at the farmers’ properties are  
very small, but unfortunately empty pesticide containers were found lying around  
houses or in orchards. Storage and handling of pesticide in pesticide shops should be  
also be considered in any GAP implementation strategy because the small village  
pesticide shops are were the pesticides are stored for local farmer needs.  
Compliance with requirement to practice IPM and minimum pesticide use is low and  
in most cases below 20%.  
Conclusions  
Conclusions of this survey were consistent with conclusions made from the survey  
conducted in 2005. It is clear from the information collected from interviews and  
observations that there are marked differences in the agro-ecological systems and  
citrus growing practices used in the Mekong Delta and the Central Coast region  
(including Nghe An province).  
Farmers need to acquire more skills in recognising pests and diseases and connecting  
these pests and diseases to the phenology of citrus trees. Spray technology is based on  
knapsack sprayers with no calibration of sprayers or proper calculation of spray  
volumes or pesticide dose. However, farmers commonly use pesticides at  
concentrations recommended on the product label. Considering the existing level of  
knowledge only simple strategies for control of pests and diseases that use a basic  
monitoring system and are related to flush cycle could be adopted by farmers. The  
IPM program developed in 2005 FFSs and revised at 2005 review meetings seems to  
be well accepted.  
There is virtually no compliance with EUREP GAP requirements. There are many  
infrastructural changes (eg. sewage system and construction of packaging  
warehouses) that need to be made before compliance with EUREP GAP could be  
11  
possible. Also improvements in the pesticide registration system should be made so  
that appropriate pesticides are registered for citrus. It appears that the difference  
between practices used in the Vietnamese citrus industry and those required by  
EUREP GAP is too great for EUREP GAP to be considered as a realistic model for  
implementation of GAP in Vietnamese citrus. A simpler model that will still ensure  
safer citrus products for consumers and reduced environmental impact appropriate for  
Vietnamese socio-economic and environmental condition should be developed.  
12  
pdf 24 trang yennguyen 11/03/2024 350
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Báo cáo Assessing the effectiveness of Farmer Field Schools for Implementation of Citrus IPM in Viet Nam", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên.

File đính kèm:

  • pdfbao_cao_assessing_the_effectiveness_of_farmer_field_schools.pdf