"It just goes to kill Ticos": national market regulation and the political ecology of farmers' pesticide use in Costa Rica

Abstract

This paper addresses pesticide residues on vegetables in developing countries through the specific case of Costa Rica. Pesticide residues are often very high on vegetables in developing countries, generally considerably higher than in industrialized countries. Using a political ecology approach, I combine qualitative and quantitative primary data with secondary data to answer two questions. Why do farmers use pesticides in a manner that results in high levels of residues on vegetables? And, how do markets with unequal regulatory strength affect farmers' pesticides use, and, by inference, the resulting exposure of different populations fed by different market segments? While usually attributed to farmer ignorance, I argue that the pesticide residue problem arises from a triad of causes: higher efficacy of more residual and toxic pesticides, combined with many vegetables' biological trait of consecutive harvests, and a volatile vegetable market upon which farm household reproduction depends. With high input costs and low farm gate prices, farmers in markets with minimal regulation will use more residual and toxic pesticides. Using the idea of a double standard, I show that lax regulation in the open national market means that farmers are less cautious about residues on national market produce than export produce, and that some export farmers use the open national market as an outlet for their produce when they use highly residual pesticides. Uneven regulations between North and South are manifested in farmer's management decisions, and lead to the injustice of higher residues in developing country vegetables.Keywords: pesticide residues; pesticide use; uneven regulation; Costa Rica; developing countries; national market vegetables; export vegetables; environmental injustice

Conventional Food Plot Management in an Organic Coffee Cooperative: Explaining the Paradox

“…Galt (2009) for sediment capture and cover cropping have been shown to reduce weed pressure, minimize erosion and increase yields without chemical inputs in Latin America (M. A. Altieri 1999) and China and Kenya (Uphoff 2002).…”

“…We found that economic considerations weighed heavily in food crop management decisions. Economic constraints often determined how, when, and which chemicals were applied (Galt 2009). However, farmers did not keep written records of their farm expenses so they were not aware of their costs and crop value until participating in this research.…”

Full Issue PDF Volume 3, Issue 3

“…Therefore, I made a choice to present the data in a way that highlighted the most substantial variation, which was across different market types, as a result of uneven regulation in the commodity chain that I theorize and show empirically. Mutersbaugh's question, however, gives me the opportunity to note that the relationship between farm scale and pesticide use is complex, as I have presented elsewhere (Galt 2008). In this other analysis, I showed that among minisquash export farmers and national market potato farmers, farmers personally spraying pesticides (rather than having a hired crew do it) was strongly and negatively related to pesticide use intensity.…”

“…I would add the importance of engaging national market producers in a similar effort, which could be spurred by better national market regulations. Elsewhere I have examined farmer subjectivities as they relate to pesticides (Galt 2013a), and in the conclusion of that piece I call for a similar approach to what Reynolds has suggested. This would be very time-intensive work that would be perfectly suited for a PhD student looking for a challenging and rewarding project and who has a lifestyle allowing for long periods of field work.…”

Food Systems in an Unequal World: Pesticides, Vegetables, and Agrarian Capitalism in Costa Rica.

“…Mutersbaugh's question, however, gives me the opportunity to note that the relationship between farm scale and pesticide use is complex, as I have presented elsewhere (Galt 2008). Mutersbaugh is correct that in the chapter focusing on export farmers (Chapter 5) I discuss them as a whole.…”