Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T00:30:31.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predator-Prey Systems in Pest Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Carolyn R. Harper
Carolyn R. Harper*
Affiliation:
Department of Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts
Get access

Abstract

The use of chemical pesticides frequently causes minor pests to become serious problems by disturbing the natural controls that keep them in check. As a result, it is possible to suffer heavier crop losses after pesticides are introduced than before their introduction. Efficient use of pesticides requires complete biological modeling that takes the appropriate predator-prey relationships into account. A bioeconomic model is introduced involving three key species: a primary target pest, a secondary pest, and a natural enemy of the secondary pest. Optimal decision rules are derived and contrasted with myopic decision making, which treats the predator-prey system as an externality. The issue of resistance in the secondary pest is examined briefly.

Type
Articles
Information
Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , April 1991 , pp. 15 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Clark, C. W. Mathematical Bioeconomics. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley, 1990.Google Scholar
Feder, G., and Regev, U. “Biological Interactions and Environmental Effects in the Economics of Pest Control.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2 (1975):75–91.Google Scholar
Getz, W. M., and Gutierrez, A. P. “Perspective on Systems Analysis in Crop Production and Insect Pest Management.” Annual Review of Entomology 27 (1982):447–66.Google Scholar
Harper, C. R., and Zilberman, D. “Pest Externalities from Agricultural Inputs.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71 (1989):692–702.Google Scholar
Kamien, M. I., and Schwartz, N. L. Dynamic Optimization: The Calculus of Variations and Optimal Control in Economics and Management. New York: North-Holland, 1981.Google Scholar
Larkin, P. A. “Interspecific Competition and Exploitation.” Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 20 (1973):647–78.Google Scholar
Lichtenberg, E., and Zilberman, D. “The Econometrics of Pesticide Use: Why Specification Matters.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 68 (1987):261–73.Google Scholar
May, R. M. Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems. Monographs in Population Biology VI. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Mesterton-Gibbons, M. “On the Optimal Policy for Combining Harvesting of Predator and Prey.” Natural Resource Modeling 3 (1988):63–90.Google Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. “Toward a World of Less Pesticide.” Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin, number 710. 1986.Google Scholar
Ragozin, D. L., and Brown, G. “Harvest Policies and Nonmarket Valuation in Predator-Prey Systems.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 12 (1985):155–68.Google Scholar
Regev, U., Shalit, H., and Gutierrez, A. P. “On the Optimal Allocation of Pesticides with Increasing Resistance: The Case of Alfalfa Weevil.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 10 (1983):86–100.Google Scholar