Health Rights Impacts by Agrochemical Business: Legally Challenging the “Myth of Safe Use”

IF 0.3 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Carolijn Terwindt, Shaelyn Gambino Morrison, C. Schliemann
{"title":"Health Rights Impacts by Agrochemical Business: Legally Challenging the “Myth of Safe Use”","authors":"Carolijn Terwindt, Shaelyn Gambino Morrison, C. Schliemann","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The past decades have seen enormous growth in the agrochemical industry. Its pesticides and fertilisers promise to farmers worldwide an increase in yields and a decrease in labour input. The expansion of the pesticides industry results in tremendous costs to others – in the form of chronic illness, acute injuries, and environmental degradation. Such costs are borne disproportionately by farm and plantation workers in the Global South due to a perilous combination of weak regulation, lack of training and access to information, and meager resources for protective equipment. Agrochemical companies continue to claim that their products are safe when used correctly by farmers and regulated effectively by the state. Advocates have attempted to use litigation as a recourse for challenging the agrochemical industry. Civil litigation against pesticides manufacturers can directly address the injuries suffered from pesticide poisoning, but such lawsuits face a number of challenges and all too often leave workers and farmers without access to an effective remedy. This article explores the potential of complementary litigation which challenges the harmful sales practices of pesticide companies, as well as the precautionary principle, as an alternative to protect pesticide users against hazards.","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.460","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The past decades have seen enormous growth in the agrochemical industry. Its pesticides and fertilisers promise to farmers worldwide an increase in yields and a decrease in labour input. The expansion of the pesticides industry results in tremendous costs to others – in the form of chronic illness, acute injuries, and environmental degradation. Such costs are borne disproportionately by farm and plantation workers in the Global South due to a perilous combination of weak regulation, lack of training and access to information, and meager resources for protective equipment. Agrochemical companies continue to claim that their products are safe when used correctly by farmers and regulated effectively by the state. Advocates have attempted to use litigation as a recourse for challenging the agrochemical industry. Civil litigation against pesticides manufacturers can directly address the injuries suffered from pesticide poisoning, but such lawsuits face a number of challenges and all too often leave workers and farmers without access to an effective remedy. This article explores the potential of complementary litigation which challenges the harmful sales practices of pesticide companies, as well as the precautionary principle, as an alternative to protect pesticide users against hazards.
农药企业对健康权利的影响:从法律上挑战“安全使用神话”
在过去的几十年里,农业化学工业取得了巨大的发展。它的杀虫剂和化肥向世界各地的农民承诺,产量会增加,劳动力投入会减少。农药行业的扩张给其他人带来了巨大的成本——以慢性病、急性伤害和环境退化的形式。由于监管不力、缺乏培训和信息获取,以及防护设备资源匮乏,全球南方的农场和种植园工人承担了不成比例的成本。农药公司继续声称,如果农民正确使用并受到国家的有效监管,他们的产品是安全的。倡导者们试图利用诉讼作为对农用化学品行业提出质疑的手段。针对农药制造商的民事诉讼可以直接解决农药中毒造成的伤害,但此类诉讼面临着许多挑战,往往使工人和农民无法获得有效的补救。本文探讨了补充诉讼的潜力,该诉讼挑战了农药公司的有害销售行为,以及预防原则,作为保护农药使用者免受危害的替代方案。
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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