Introduction

More than half the world’s population now lives in urban and peri-urban environments. In the tropics and sub-tropics, Aedes aegypti, the main mosquito vector of dengue, breeds in the vast numbers of water-filled container habitats that typically characterize this milieu. The female mosquito also has ready access to human blood for its reproductive requirements. In turn this facilitates dengue virus circulation and an estimated 50–100 million infections now occur annually (WHO, 2012).

Although efforts continue towards the development of a dengue vaccine for public health use, the challenge of necessarily producing a tetravalent vaccine that confers immunity to all four dengue viruses has yet to be met (Schmitz et al., 2011). In the continued absence of complimentary measures, vector control remains the only method for dengue transmission control. However, the high fecundity of Ae. aegypti and its exquisite adaptability for co-habitation with humans, ensures that populations rebound quickly when control measures are eased.

The magnitude of the vector control task is such that for most public health services, resource limitations demand, at the very least, prioritization of areas for the sustained delivery of effective interventions. Such interventions typically comprise source reduction and insecticide applications, though in the latter case vector susceptibility to widely available insecticides is declining. Even well-resourced programmes are often unable to achieve adequate coverage. Reasons may include the absence of household members during the working day; there may be concerns about security; or cultural taboos may limit entry to household compounds by male workers.

With good public health oversight, guidance and partnership, involvement of a wider community of stakeholders in the application of vector control measures offers better prospects than vertical programmes for more extensive and thorough coverage of dwellings and workplaces. In many urban landscapes, community participation facilitates access to areas and habitats that may otherwise be inaccessible to government workers.

A prerequisite of effective social mobilization approaches is a thorough understanding of the biology of the vector and a situation analysis of its local ecology. This becomes of paramount importance when source reduction measures are envisaged, to ensure that interventions are aimed at the management or removal of the most important container types, i.e., those contributing significantly to the production of adult mosquitoes. The research described in this supplement applies pupal productivity survey methods (Nathan, Focks and Kroeger, 2006) to help identify and target those key containers.

Equally important is the need to fully understand the socio-cultural characteristics that result in the proliferation of the key container types, be they water-storage containers or solid waste discards. Only then is it possible to identify and meaningfully engage with stakeholders in the development of vector control interventions that are appropriate, effective and sustainable. Where water and solid waste management become the focus of control efforts, it seems likely to confer additional, and as yet poorly defined, public health benefits for the community.

The research shows how an evidence-based approach to dengue vector control and a strong emphasis on community participation can result in significant levels of control. These are essential elements of integrated vector management, the global strategy for vector control (WHO, 2004).