Double standards and the international trade of pesticides: The Brazilian case

International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 24-35

  Porto, Marcelo Firpo ^a   Milanez, Bruno ^b   Soares, Wagner Lopes ^c   Meyer, Armando ^d  

^a INSTITUTO OSWALDO CRUZ   (Brazil)

^b Inst of Applied Economic Research   (Brazil)

^c INSTITUTO BRASILEIRO DE GEOGRAFIA E ESTATÍSTICA   (Brazil)

^d FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Brazil; Double standard; Imports and exports; Pesticides

Indexed keywords

CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON; PESTICIDE;

AGRICULTURE; ARTICLE; BRAZIL; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; ECONOMICS; EUROPEAN UNION; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; LEGAL ASPECT; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; POLICY; UNITED STATES;

AGRICULTURE; BRAZIL; COMMERCE; EUROPEAN UNION; HUMANS; HYDROCARBONS, CHLORINATED; INTERNATIONALITY; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; PESTICIDES; PUBLIC POLICY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 74749102505     PISSN: 10773525     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1179/oeh.2010.16.1.24     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Agriculture and Agri Food Canada. Agri-Food past, present & future: Brazil [Internet]. 2005 [cited 19 August 2009]. Available from: http://www.ats-sea.agr.gc.ca/lat/4034-eng.pdf.
2. Castleman B. The "double standard" in industrial hazards. Public Health Review. 1980; 9 (3-4):169-184.
3. Castleman BI, Navarro N. International mobility of hazardous products, industries, and wastes. Annu Rev of Public Health. 1987; 8:1-19.
4. Jeyaratnam J. The transfer of hazardous industries. Occup Med. 1990; 40 (4):123-126.
5. Barrios P. The Rotterdam Convention on hazardous chemicals: A meaningful step toward environmental protection? Georgetown Int Environ Law Rev. 2004; 16 (4):679-762.
6. Colopy J. Poisoning the developing world: The exportation of unregistered and severely restricted pesticides from the United States. UCLA J of Environ Law and Policy. 1994; 13:167-224.
7. Smith C. Pesticide exports from US ports 1997-2000. Int J of Occup and Environ Health. 2001; 7 (4):266-274.
8. Smith C, Kerr K, Sadripour A. Pesticide exports from US Ports, 2001-2003. Int J of Occup and Environ Health. 2008; 14 (3):176-186.
9. Clapp J. Foreign direct investment in hazardous industries in developing countries: Rethinking the debate. Environ Politics. 1998; 7 (4):92-113.
10. Cole MA. Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: Examining the linkages. Ecol Econ. 2004; 48 (1):71-81.
11. Xing Y, Kolstad CD. Do lax environmental regulation attract foreign investment? Environ and Resource Econ. 2002; 21 (1):1-22.
12. Moreira JC, Jacob SC, Peres F et al. Avaliação integrada do impacto do uso de agrotóxicos sobre a saúde humana em uma comunidade agrícola de Nova Friburgo/RJ. [Integrated evaluation of the health impact of pesticide use in a community at Nova Friburgo, RJ]. Ciência e Saúde Coletiva 2002; 7 (2):299-311.
13. Silva JJO, Alves SR, Meyer A et al. Influência de fatores sócioeconômicos na contaminação por agrotóxicos, Brasil. [Influence of social-economic factors on pesticide poisoning in Brazil]. Revista de Saúde Pública 2001; 35 (2):130-135.
14. Paumgartten FJR, Delgado IF, Oliveira ES et al. Levels of organochlorine pesticides in the blood serum of agricultural workers from Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil. Cadernos de Saúde Pública. 1998; 14 (Suppl 3):S33-S39.
15. Guimarães RM, Asmus CIRF, Meyer A. DDT reintroduction for malaria control: The cost-benefit debate for public health. Cadernos de Saúde Pública. 2007; 23 (12):2835-2844.
16. Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA). Relatório de consumo de ingredientes ativos de agrotóxicos e afins no Brasil. [Report on the consumption of pesticide ingredients and similar products in Brazil]. Brasília: Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Reno-váveis; 2004.
17. Jaga K, Dharmani C. Global surveillance of DDT and DDE levels in human tissues. Int J of Occup Med and Environ Health. 2003; 16 (1):7-20.
18. European Commission. Plant protection products-existing active substances decisions and review reports [Internet]. 2007 [cited 02 July 2007]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/ food/plant/protection/evaluation/exist-subs-rep-en. htm.
19. National Health Surveillance Agency Brazil (ANVISA). Visalegis- Legislação em vigilância sanitária. [Legislation and Health Surveillance] [Internet]. 2007 [cited 07 February 2007]. Available from: http://e-legis.anvisa.gov.br/leisinf/public/ home.php.
20. US Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticide reregistration status [Internet]. 2007 [cited 11 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/ pesticides/reregistration/status-page-p. htm.
21. Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA). PAN pesticide database-pesticide registration status [Internet]. 2007 [cited 11 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.pesticideinfo. org/Index.html.
22. Foundation for Advancements in Science and Education. FASE research report: Exporting risks, pesticide exports from the US ports, 1995-1996 [Internet]. 1998 [cited 02 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.fasenet.org/ environment.html.
23. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, United Nations Environment Programme. Rotterdam Convention on the prior informed consent procedure for certain hazardous chemicals and pesticides in international trade [Internet]. 2005 [cited 02 July 2007]. Available from: http://www. pic.int.
24. World Health Organization. Public health impact of pesticides used in agriculture. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1990.
25. Ministério do Desenvolvimento Indústria e Comércio Exterior. [Ministry of Development, Industry, and Foreign Trade]. [Internet]. AliceWeb 2007 [cited 11 July 2007]. Available from: http://aliceweb. desenvolvimento.gov.br.
26. Carson R. Silent spring. Boston; New York: Houghton Mifflin; 1962.
27. European Commission. Commission Decision 2007/416/EC 2007 [Internet]. 2007 [cited 03 June 2009]. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri= OJ:L:2007:156:0030:0031:EN:PDF.
28. European Commission. Review report for the active substance carbofuran-Carbofuran SANCO/10054/2006 (final) [Internet]. 2007 [cited 03 June 2009]. Available from: http://ec. europa.eu/food/plant/protection/evaluation/ existactive/list-carbofuran.pdf.
29. National Health Surveillance Agency Brazil (ANVISA). Sistema de informações sobre agrotóxicos [Internet]. 2007 [cited 07 February 2007]. Available from: http://www4.anvisa.gov.br/ agrosia/asp/default. asp.
30. US Environmental Protection Agency. Reregistration eligibility decision for endosulfan [Internet]. 2002 [cited 26 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/endo sulfan-red.pdf.
31. Hammer J, Baier A, Smolka S. The problem of endosulfan [Internet]. 2005 [cited 10 August 2007]. Available from: http://www.pan-germany.org/download/ endosulfan-engl. pdf.
32. European Commission. Commission Directive 2005/864/ EC [Internet]. 2005 [cited 11 December 2006]. Available from: http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ site/en/oj/2005/l-317/l-31720051203en00250028.pdf.
33. Extension Toxicology Network. Monocrotophos [Internet]. 1995 [cited 26 July 2007]. Available from: http://pmep.cce. cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/ metiram-propoxur/mono crotophos-ext.html.
34. European Commission. Commission Regulation 2076/2002 [Internet]. 2002 [cited 27 July 2007]. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ: L:2002:319:0003:0011:EN:PDF.
35. National Health Surveillance Agency Brazil (ANVISA). Resoluç ão RDC no 215. Diário Oficial 2006. Brasilia, Brazil: ANVISA; 2006
36. US Environmental Protection Agency. Interim reregistration eligibility decision for methyl parathion case no. 0153 [Internet]. 2003 [cited 24 July 2007]. Available from: http://www. epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/methylparathion-ired. pdf.
37. European Commission. Commission Directive 2003/112/EC [Internet]. 2003 [cited 27 July 2007]. Available from: http:// ec.europa.eu/food/plant/ protection/evaluation/existactive/ oj-paraquat.pdf.
38. US Environmental Protection Agency. Reregistration eligibility decision for 2,4-D list case no. 0073 [Internet]. 2005 [cited 26 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/ REDs/24d-red.pdf.
39. European Commission. Review report for the active substance 2,4-D [Internet]. 2001 [cited 26 July 2007]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/food/ plant/protection/evaluation/exist active/list1-2-4-d-en.pdf.
40. US Environmental Protection Agency. Interim reregistration eligibility decision for chlorpyrifos [Internet]. 2001 [cited 24 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/ chlorpyrifos-ired.pdf.
41. US Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticide news story: Chlorpyrifos pre-construction termiticide products phase out on December 31, 2005 [Internet]. 2005 [cited 24 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/csb- page/ updates/chlorpy-phasout.htm.
42. European Commission. Commission Directive 2005/72/EC [Internet]. 2005 [cited 27 July 2007]. Available from: http:// eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX: 32005L0072:EN:HTML.
43. US Environmental Protection Agency. Interim reregistration eligibility decision for methamidophos case no. 0043 [Internet]. 2002 [cited 26 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.epa. gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/methamidophos-ired.pdf.
44. European Commission. EU pesticides database [Internet]. 2008 [cited 03 June 2009]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/ sanco-pesticides/public/index. cfm?event=activesubstance. selection&a=1.
45. US Environmental Protection Agency. Reregistration eligibility decision for paraquat dichloride LIST A CASE 0262. [Internet]. 1997 [cited 26 April 2007]. Available from: http://www.epa. gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/0262red.pdf.
46. Dinham B. The perils of paraquat: Sales targeted at developing countries. Pesticides news: The J of Pesticide Action Network UK. 2003; 60: pages 4-7.
47. US Environmental Protection Agency. Reregistration eligibility decision for mancozeb [Internet]. 2005 [cited 25 July 2007]. Available from: http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/manco zeb-red.pdf.
48. National Health Surveillance Agency Brazil (ANVISA). Reavaliaç ãode agrotóxicos: 10 anos de proteção a população [Pesticide reevaluation: Ten years protecting society] [Internet]. 2009 [cited 18 September 2009]. Available from: http://www.anvisa. gov.br/divulga/noticias/2009/020409.htm.
49. Siqueira CE, Levenstein C. Dependent convergence: The importation of technological hazards by semiperipheral countries. Int J of Health Services 2000; 30 (4):681-697.
50. ABIQUIM. A indústria química brasileira em 2008 [Internet]. 2008 [cited 02 June 2009]. Available from: http://www.abiquim. org.br/.
51. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAOSTAT 2009 [Internet]. 2009[cited 02 Jun 2009]. Available from: http://faostat. fao.org/.
52. IBGE. Produção agrícola municipal [Internet]. 2009 [cited 02 Jun 2009]. Available from: http://www.sidra.ibge.gov.br.
53. World Health Organization. The WHO recommended classification of pesticides by hazard and guidelines to classification 2004. Geneva: WHO/IPCS-International Programme on Chemical Safety; 2005.