Integrated Weed Management: PRActical Implementation and Solutions for Europe

Project Information

IWMPRAISE

Grant agreement ID: 727321

DOI

10.3030/727321

Project closed

EC signature date 10 May 2017

Start date 1 June 2017

End date 30 November 2022

Funded under

• SOCIETAL CHALLENGES - Food security, sustainable agriculture and forestry, marine, maritime and inland water research, and the bioeconomy

Total cost

€ 7 237 212,50

EU contribution

€ 6 600 746,25

Coordinated by

AARHUS UNIVERSITET
Denmark

Periodic Reporting for period 4 - IWMPRAISE (Integrated Weed Management: PRActical Implementation and Solutions for Europe)

Reporting period: 2021-09-01 to 2022-11-30

Summary of the context and overall objectives of the project

Currently, the reliance on herbicides is very high in conventional farming systems. There are several reasons for this, such as the lack of commonly agreed thresholds3 and, until recently, also the lack of effective, readily applicable, cost-effective (in terms of investments and labour costs) non-chemical methods. There are two factors driving the immediate need to change weed control strategies in conventional farming: the rapidly increasing problem of herbicide resistance and the fact that herbicides are the main cause of contamination of both surface waters and groundwater. In addition to these two immediate concerns, it is also widely acknowledged that herbicides have partly been responsible for recent declines in farmland biodiversity and hence a negative impact on the associated ecosystem services

The overall objective of IWMPRAISE is to demonstrate that adoption of IWM supports more sustainable cropping systems both agronomically and environmentally, which are resilient to e.g. climate changes without jeopardising profitability or the steady supply of food, feed and biomaterials. IWMPRAISE aims to develop, test and assess management strategies delivered across whole cropping systems for four contrasting management scenarios representing typical crops in Europe. The specific objectives are to 1) quantify and address current socio-economic and agronomic barriers to the uptake of IWM 2) design, evaluate and optimise novel alternative weed control methods and create a ‘tool box’ of validated IWM methods 3) assess the agronomic performance and environmental and economic sustainability of IWM strategies and 4) make results available to end users. The development of IWM strategies are supported by work delivering practical knowledge and tools as well as knowledge and tools for assessing and disseminating the strategies ensuring a vertical integration of the project.

Work performed from the beginning of the project to the end of the period covered by the report and main results achieved so far

The perception of IWM by experts and farmers have been mapped, and the results have aided the design of IWM strategies in the project. An IWM framework was developed based on the expertise in the project and further developed into an interactive tool, which is available online. This is a strong dissemination tool to underline the importance of diversity in management strategies in both annual and perennial crops. Traditional dissemination activities as conference presentations and scientific publications have been applied for communicating with the research community. Dissemination to agricultural advisors and farmers has included social media postings, open field days, inspirational sheets, tool sheets, booklets presenting the experimental work, an IPM board game and e-learning material.
The potential conflict between IWM and non-inversion tillage/conservation agriculture were addressed by studying the transition phase from conventional soil tillage to no-till agriculture and using an existing long-term trial to further extend the results after the transition phase. There are complex interactions at work in no-till systems that do indeed increase soil fertility, but affect the ability to manage weeds and maintain crop yield compared to tilled systems.
A large variety of weed management strategies and IPM measures have been evaluated in the four categories of crops included in the project; annual narrow row crops, annual wide row crops, herbaceous and woody perennial crops. The studies included existing knowledge and innovative approaches applied in different settings along a North-South gradient in Europe. In the project, the innovation hub investigated the opportunities to take technologies from testing stages to practical implementation. The short-term experimental trials provided valuable support for dissemination of IWM practices and supplied data for the long-term analyses of weed development and the related economic and environmental consequences for farmers.
Different modelling approaches to determine the long-term effects of cropping systems modifications were applied and a general conclusion was that the agricultural system had a strong influence on both the weed community and the productivity of the crop, and affected the efficacy of the various weed management practices. The consequences of replacing herbicides with non-chemical weed control measures in terms of environmental risk and demand for energy and labour input was evaluated. Analyses of multiple scenarios of landscape configuration and composition of different management strategies provided insight into the interactions between managing weeds for ecosystem services and weed harmfulness to crops both at the field and landscape scales.

Progress beyond the state of the art and expected potential impact (including the socio-economic impact and the wider societal implications of the project so far)

IWMPRAISE has combined activities centered on research & development (R&D), with activities that adopt the “interaction innovation model’, involving end users and other actors in a partnership with public research institutes and private businesses, adopting a truly bottom-up approach. IWMPRAISE committed resources to provide the theoretical background as well as the tools required to successfully implement the “interaction innovation model”. IWMPRAISE has addressed lack of knowledge or need for further development in close collaboration with the SMEs providing the non-chemical IWM tools by setting up an ‘innovation hub’. Practical implementation was ensured through field experimentation in a broad variety of crop types. The long-term agronomic benefits, such as a lower weed density, a more diverse weed flora, a lower risk of developing herbicide resistance and a higher robustness of the cropping system to future climate changes was assessed by modelling approaches along with environmental and economic sustainability of the IWM strategies. Overarching these activities were communication and dissemination, outreach and networking.

IWMPRAISE has had a strong focus on the fact that without the acceptance and support of the end user, IWM strategies cannot be successfully implemented in practice. Assessments of the end users perception of risk and barriers for implementation of IWM has provided valuable knowledge and input for dissemination and need for practical validation of concepts. By including a diversity of stakeholders at every stage of the project and acknowledging their different priorities, IWMPRAISE aimed at designing and implementing systems that optimized trade-offs between agronomic, economic and environmental assessment metrics.

Five pillars of Integrated Weed Management according to the interviewed experts in the IWMPRAISE par