|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 PAN International Website |
|
|
Pesticides News international coverage
Worldwide, pesticides are a major killer and source of environmental contamination. While much attention in recent years has been given to the adverse impacts of genetic engineering it must not be forgotten that pesticides are still responsible for the deaths of 20,000 people annually. They contaminate vital water sources and contribute to ozone depletion. In this 50th issue of Pesticides News, Topsy Jewell, a PAN UK Board Member, reviews the international issues covered.
Pesticide News has played an important role in keeping these issues in sharp focus. It has reported on the human tragedies, reminding us with on-the-ground case studies that in many locations, safe pesticide use is a contradiction in terms.
PN has closely followed international action to control hazardous pesticides, critically reporting on developments concerning the Food and Agriculture Organisation’s (FAO) International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides (FAO Code), the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure, Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), locust control and stockpiles of obsolete pesticides.
PN has also focused attention on developments in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and the successes that have led many farmers to reduce and even eliminate pesticide use. The long-term outlook for reducing pesticide hazards, however, looks bleak. The effects of trade liberalisation, genetic engineering and the ‘new green revolution’ are to further intensify pesticide use and to threaten people’s health and well being as well as their long term food security.
 |
PAN campaigns
In 1985 the Pesticide Action Network launched its Dirty Dozen campaign to target a list of particularly hazardous pesticides for strict controls and bans. The goals of this campaign have largely remained the same over the past 15 years: to eliminate the use of hazardous pesticides and to promote sustainable pest control methods. What has changed throughout this time, however, is the scale and diversity of pesticide markets, the range and intricacy of the conditions of use and the scope and complexity of the international regulatory system. PN has documented these changes and helped to define the problems and issues that need addressing. One important aspect has been to raise the profile of women in agriculture – both as farmers and as farm workers. There is evidence that a significant number of pesticides have reproductive effects, yet very little has been done to monitor these impacts under real working conditions or specifically to control the use of such pesticides. The point has been made that IPM strategies also need to recognise the crucial role of women and to ensure that training and education opportunities address the particular needs of women farmers.
Vulnerable exposures
In September 1997 PN reported on congenital deformities of children born to parents exposed to pesticides in the fruit growing region of Chile. Reproductive hazards are intrinsically difficult to identify because of the time lag between pesticide exposure and effect. In June 1999, PN published a review of a series of FAO studies undertaken in Indonesia to investigate the impacts of pesticides on women. The article raised the issue that occupational health issues faced by women are often ignored by scientists and legislators. The FAO studies revealed appalling conditions of pesticide use in the farming communities observed. Here underlying factors such as poverty or lack of power meant that pregnant women workers had little choice but to spray. Because of these conditions of use, the article concludes that pesticide reduction programmes and international bans on hazardous pesticides may provide the best ‘big solution’.
The human tragedy
Farm workers, rural communities and consumers are all vulnerable to the impacts of pesticides on health and the environment. The difficulties in ensuring the safe use of hazardous pesticides are illustrated in the tens of thousands of poisoning cases annually. PN has documented how, in numerous instances, the education and safe use programmes implemented by manufacturers have little impact on the lives of pesticide sprayers who have no choice over their working conditions. Many of the problems described in PN are precisely those which the FAO Code and the PIC provisions were designed to minimise. Yet the pesticides implicated in these poisonings often remain outside the international regulatory systems.
PN has also reported on the problems of increased pesticide production in Latin America and Asia where there are concerns over safety standards and the transfer of hazardous technology from the North. The legacy of Bhopal lingers on and PN has kept readers informed of the suffering that remains 16 years after the accident including the reproductive health impacts of women affected.
Illness and death
In October 1991 PN reported that 350 people, 31 of whom died, were poisoned by endosulfan in Sudan when they ate bread made from contaminated maize flour. The manufacturers Hoechst, argued that although endosulfan has high acute toxicity its ‘hazards can be overcome if the compound is used with proper care’. Yet in 2000, a report from Benin shows the havoc that endosulfan is still causing to farming communities. In June 1992 PN reviewed research compiled by PAN groups in central America and Malaysia which demonstrated how paraquat under conditions of use in these countries is a major occupational hazard for plantation workers. In June 1996, PN reported on a study which estimated that in 1995 there were 15,300 agricultural pesticide poisoning cases in China, 91% involving organophosphate insecticides. In March 2000, PN reported on the Del Monte Kenya pineapple plantation. Pesticides which the FAO recommends are too dangerous to use in developing countries are used on the plantation and there appears to be no training for workers, yet the company claims to take part in a programme for the responsible use of pesticides run by the Global Crop Protection Federation.
International action
For the past two decades, PAN groups around the world have worked to make voluntary codes and legally binding instruments more effective in reducing pesticide hazards.
The FAO Code was adopted in 1985 and amended to include the principle of Prior Informed Consent (PIC) in 1989. PIC is the concept that an exporting country intending to make a shipment of hazardous pesticides to an importing country should secure the importing country’s consent prior to shipment. Nearly ten years later, in September 1998, governments agreed the Rotterdam Convention establishing PIC in international law. The Convention aims to control trade in hazardous chemicals and covers banned and severely restricted pesticides as well as pesticides that are too dangerous under actual conditions of use in developing countries. A mechanism to phase out persistent organic pollutants (POPs) is underway (see page 6).
Since its first issue, PN has reported on the development of PIC, described by one author as ‘a bitter political wrangle dating back over fifteen years’. One of the key contentious issues has been the question of precisely which pesticides the scheme applies to. PAN groups have argued since its adoption in 1989 that if PIC is to be effective it must apply not only to banned pesticides but also pesticides which cause particular problems under conditions of use in developing countries. PAN groups in countries across Africa, Asia and Latin America compiled extensive evidence about the problems of these pesticides.
The Convention fully recognised this need and addresses ‘severely hazardous pesticide formulations’, causing not only health, but also environmental problems in developing countries. In 1991 the first five of such hazardous pesticides were included on the voluntary PIC list, and now in the Convention. PIC offers an important channel for information exchange on hazardous pesticides, but it must be seen as a minimal requirement for controlling the trade in hazardous pesticides. The long term solution being investment in sustainable pest control methods to enable countries to move away from pesticide dependence.
Global intitiatives
Fifteen years after the FAO Code was agreed, there has been significant progress on pesticide legislation and only a few countries lack any form of regulatory framework. The difficulty remains in implementation since many governments lack capacity and resources to manage pesticides effectively.
A very practical initiative to strengthen this capacity was a joint pilot study by the United Nations Institute for Training and Research and the International Programme on Chemical Safety. Risk Assessment case studies were conducted in four developing countries for problem chemicals selected by a task force. The results of these case studies were presented and discussed at a workshop in 1999. The most important outcome identified by participants – including government representatives, public interest groups and industry – was the increased capacity of those involved in understanding and applying risk assessment methods to local conditions of pesticide use.
Sustainable solutions
More than half a million rice farmers in Asia use integrated pest management (IPM) to control pests. They have dramatically reduced pesticide use and increased individual profits. IPM involves choosing a range of appropriate pest control techniques such as resistant varieties, natural predators, and cropping techniques. If pesticides are used they are only used as a last resort and must be carefully selected to avoid chemicals that kill beneficial insects. IPM is most successful when farmers are involved in all aspects of the programme including the research, evaluation, training and dissemination of information. Since the 1990s, FAO collaborative programmes with South and South-East Asian governments have pioneered Farmer Field Schools with great successes. Similar programmes have been developed in Africa and PN has documented examples of how farmer-based IPM programmes are effective, practical, and financially viable under a wide range of ecological and agro-economic conditions.
At the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio, governments agreed to ‘increase food production in a sustainable way and enhance food security’ (Chapter 14 of Agenda 21). Governments endorsed IPM, acknowledging its role in sustainable agriculture and rural development. The OECD has since made significant progress in its pesticide risk reduction work. Another important development was the establishment of the Global IPM Facility – a joint endeavour involving amongst others the FAO and the World Bank. Its aim is to help farmers and governments to implement sustainable pest control strategies. It has been instrumental in developing IPM programmes in the Middle East, Latin America and Africa.
Yet for all these very positive institutional developments and the practical success of farmer based IPM programmes, the overall balance of commitment from governments and the intergovernmental agencies remains with a ‘new green revolution’ – promoting more high yielding varieties, more pesticides and more fertilisers. At the 1996 World Food Summit hosted by the FAO, the Plan of Action presented to governments emphasised ‘modern’ strategies and technology transfer which could result in increased pesticide use. Pesticide hazards were barely addressed.
If international efforts to control hazardous pesticides such as PIC and the FAO Code are to have a significant impact then governments will need to start agreeing targets and strategies to reduce pesticide use and to stop adopting policies that increase their use. The Earth Summit will be revisited in 2002 – ten years after Rio, this is an opportunity for governments and the intergovernmental agencies to give their vigorous support to real sustainable solutions.
Trends undermining progress
The Agreement on Agriculture was included in the Uruguay Round in 1994. This has led to pressure on developing countries to liberalise markets and remove protective measures. In Mexico, the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) led to a dramatic rise of imported corn from the US, a staple food grown by peasant farmers. The cheaper American corn has driven down prices undercutting the Mexican farmers who have been encouraged to switch to fruit and vegetables production for export, requiring higher inputs of costly pesticides.
GE crops are designed for industrial scale monocultures dependent on pesticides. In developing countries, farmers can successfully control pests by encouraging biodiversity and natural enemies of pests. Monocultures are prone to more aggressive pests and diseases requiring more and stronger pesticides. Many farmers in the Philippines have already been sold GE crops although there is no evidence that they will increase yields or ensure safe pesticide use. Moreover, pesticide manufacturers promote pesticides and GE seeds as compatible with IPM programmes. Most pesticides sold are broad spectrum and would kill off organisms that are central to the IPM system.
Topsy Jewell is an environmental researcher based in Lewes, England.