Safer than in the USA? The Reception of Silent Spring in France and the Difficulties in Achieving European Regulations on Pesticides, 1962–1976

IF 0.3 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Bleuen Merrer, François Dedieu, Céline Pessis, Christophe Bonneuil
{"title":"Safer than in the USA? The Reception of\n Silent Spring\n in France and the Difficulties in Achieving European Regulations on Pesticides, 1962–1976","authors":"Bleuen Merrer, François Dedieu, Céline Pessis, Christophe Bonneuil","doi":"10.3828/whpge.63837646622494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n From having been a net food importer before World War Two, France rapidly became a leading European agricultural producer and the world’s second largest agricultural exporter – a model fueled by extensive use of pesticides. How, then, was the French reception of Rachel Carson’s work on the association of pesticides with health issues and environmental damage? This article constructed a corpus of 288 publications debating\n Silent Spring\n from 1962 to 1975 to map the trajectory of the controversy. We also mobilise rich archives collections to document how key actors and institutions endeavoured to control the fire sparked by\n Printemps silencieux\n and slow down the progress of new Europe-wide regulations. Lastly, we illuminate how, by 1969–1976, export imperatives and associated market-harmonisation concerns were factors as important as environment and health concerns for explaining the ban of a few molecules and the first 1976 EEC Directive regulating residues levels.\n \n \n This article was published open access under a CC BY licence:\n https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0\n .\n","PeriodicalId":42763,"journal":{"name":"Global Environment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/whpge.63837646622494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

From having been a net food importer before World War Two, France rapidly became a leading European agricultural producer and the world’s second largest agricultural exporter – a model fueled by extensive use of pesticides. How, then, was the French reception of Rachel Carson’s work on the association of pesticides with health issues and environmental damage? This article constructed a corpus of 288 publications debating Silent Spring from 1962 to 1975 to map the trajectory of the controversy. We also mobilise rich archives collections to document how key actors and institutions endeavoured to control the fire sparked by Printemps silencieux and slow down the progress of new Europe-wide regulations. Lastly, we illuminate how, by 1969–1976, export imperatives and associated market-harmonisation concerns were factors as important as environment and health concerns for explaining the ban of a few molecules and the first 1976 EEC Directive regulating residues levels. This article was published open access under a CC BY licence: https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0 .
比美国更安全?1962-1976 年《寂静的春天》在法国的反响以及欧洲在制定农药法规方面遇到的困难
法国在第二次世界大战前是一个粮食净进口国,后来迅速成为欧洲主要的农业生产国和世界第二大农产品出口国--杀虫剂的广泛使用推动了这一模式的发展。那么,法国是如何接受蕾切尔-卡森关于杀虫剂与健康问题和环境破坏相关联的著作的呢?本文从 1962 年至 1975 年间讨论《寂静的春天》的 288 种出版物中构建了一个语料库,以描绘这场争论的轨迹。我们还利用丰富的档案资料,记录了主要参与者和机构如何努力控制 "寂静的春天 "所引发的战火,以及如何延缓欧洲范围内新法规的出台。最后,我们阐明了在 1969-1976 年间,出口需要和相关的市场协调问题是如何成为与环境和健康问题同等重要的因素,来解释为什么要禁止少数分子和 1976 年第一项欧共体指令来规范残留水平。 本文以 CC BY 许可方式公开发表:https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0 。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Environment
Global Environment ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
25.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The half-yearly journal Global Environment: A Journal of History and Natural and Social Sciences acts as a forum and echo chamber for ongoing studies on the environment and world history, with special focus on modern and contemporary topics. Our intent is to gather and stimulate scholarship that, despite a diversity of approaches and themes, shares an environmental perspective on world history in its various facets, including economic development, social relations, production government, and international relations. One of the journal’s main commitments is to bring together different areas of expertise in both the natural and the social sciences to facilitate a common language and a common perspective in the study of history. This commitment is fulfilled by way of peer-reviewed research articles and also by interviews and other special features. Global Environment strives to transcend the western-centric and ‘developist’ bias that has dominated international environmental historiography so far and to favour the emergence of spatially and culturally diversified points of view. It seeks to replace the notion of ‘hierarchy’ with those of ‘relationship’ and ‘exchange’ – between continents, states, regions, cities, central zones and peripheral areas – in studying the construction or destruction of environments and ecosystems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信