Botanical Pesticides (BPs) have been cited and are used as alternative to synthetic pesticides in agricultural systems worldwide. The BPs are believed to be safe to the environment and are used in pest control to avoid pesticidal pollution, which is a universal problem. In this review, authors provide comprehensive information on the use of BPs in management of common bean pests in Africa. This piece of literature is useful due to major negative side effects to the environment as well as human health arising from synthetic chemicals. It is due to this reason that the authors composed this review to provide insights on potentiality of the BPs in Africa. Generally, it is believed that majority of Africans, feel that BPs are their heritage, thus any technology derived from the BPs is likely to be highly adopted. This review highlights importance, preparation and different methods of applying the BPs so that farmers and other users of this document can easily understand quick methods of using BPs as alternative to synthetic pesticides in combating common bean pests in Africa. Furthermore, areas for future research have been highlighted to establish the need of moving the BPs industry forward for pest management in common bean and other crops in Africa.

A Randomized Complete Block Design experiment was laid out in four replications to evaluate abundance of natural enemies (NEs) and aphid infestation on common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L) when intercropped with pesticidal plants (PPs) namely Tagetes minuta, Bidens pilosa, Ageratum conyzoides, Ocimum suave and Hyptis suaveolens. The results showed that PPs attracted NEs and pollinators and reduced aphid infestation with no or little negative effect on bean actual yield. Increased NEs and pollinators was probably attributed to plant diversity created by intercropping system, which provide a greater number of opportunities for NEs and pollinators to survive in agricultural systems. However, the degree of abundance of NEs and pollinators differed among treatments. H. suaveolens and O. suave attracted high proportion of pollinators compared with other treatments, while B. pilosa, T. minuta and A. conyzoides attracted high proportion of NEs compared with H. suaveolens and O. suave. Likewise, abundance, incidence and severity of aphids was lower in the intercropped plots implying positive effects of the PPs-bean intercrop in reducing number of aphids. On repelling effects, all PPs repelled aphids in comparison with the control (unintercropped common bean). Further work is required to determine the exact cause of the yield variability in common bean intercropped with H. suaveolens and O. suave compared with the yield of the same common bean when intercropped with other treatments in the same study.