Free Trade and Pesticides in Central
America
By Erika Rosenthal
Central America is in a unique
position to address the most
troubling health impacts of the
occupational use of pesticides. New
data from the Pan-American Health
Organization estimates almost
400,000 pesticide poisonings occur
each year in the region, identifies
a short-list of worst actor
pesticides responsible for the
majority of poisonings, and points
to an effective public health based
solution to the pesticide problem
(see
Pesticide Poisoning). As a
result, a unique coalition of public
health agencies and civil society is
demanding reviews of the
registration of the worst actor
pesticides and region-wide adoption
of the newer and more progressive
pesticide and toxic substances laws
that civil society organizations
have campaigned for and won in
several countries in the region.
If this new regulatory stance sounds
too good to be true, it just might
be. The agrochemical industry has
not taken these developments lying
down. Alarmed that national
democratic processes might achieve
new pesticide bans, the industry has
looked to negotiations for a
regional free trade agreement, the
Central American Customs Union, as
an avenue to achieve the
deregulation of pesticides
throughout the region. Pesticide
industry representatives(1) were
invited to participate as official
members of government delegations to
the Customs Union negotiations as
early as 1997, years before the
general public and Health Ministries
knew that the trade agreement was
being proposed.
Deregulating Pesticides,
Undermining Democracy
The industry is proposing that a
"Unified Pesticide Registry" be
established among all the countries
party to the Central American trade
accord. The Unified Registry would
enable a pesticide registered in any
one of the countries within the
Customs Union to be automatically
registered in all the other member
countries, and circulate freely
within the Union. If the Unified
Pesticide Registry is adopted it
will make it virtually impossible in
the future to ban a pesticide at the
national level, and it will severely
undermine the more progressive,
health-based provisions of the
registration process in countries
such as Nicaragua with stronger
pesticide regulation. The Unified
Pesticide Registry, like many
provisions of free trade agreements
within the WTO (World Trade
Organization) and the proposed FTAA
(Free Trade of All the Americas), is
not only bad for public health and
the environment, but also profoundly
anti-democratic.
The pesticide problem in Central
America
Central America has led the world in
pesticide imports and use per
capita, as well as in consequent
pesticide problems. A multi-year
program of epidemiological
surveillance conducted by the
Pan-American Health Organization and
the Ministries of Health calculates
almost 400,000 incidences of
pesticide poisonings each year in
Central America. Twelve pesticides
have been identified as the worst
actors, responsible for the
overwhelming majority of these
poisonings -- aldicarb, aluminum
phosphide, carbofuran, chlorpyrifos,
endosulfan, ethoprophos,
methamidophos, methomyl,
methylparathion, monocrotophos,
paraquat and terbufos.
Banning these extremely toxic
pesticides -- the New Dirty Dozen --
would go a long way to protect
public health in the region. In
fact, in some countries such as
Nicaragua, it's estimated that
banning just five of these worst
actors -- methamidofos, methomil,
chlorpyrifos, paraquat and aluminum
phosphide -- would reduce pesticide
poisonings by an astounding 80%. The
health sector has taken a clear
stand in the RESSCAD resolution (the
annual meeting of the health
ministers in Central America and the
Dominican Republic) calling for
controls on the 12 worst actor
pesticides the Subregion.(2)
Civil society groups like PAN
Central America are working with
Ministries of Health to extend the
progressive provisions of new
pesticide and environmental laws of
several countries throughout the
region. For example, in Nicaragua
the Pesticide and Toxic Substances
Law adopted in 1998 (Law 274(3))
gives the health ministry legally
binding authority to issue a
toxicological evaluation of new
pesticides proposed for
registration. Using their authority
under this law, the Nicaraguan
ministry has blocked registration of
numerous pesticides that presented
unacceptable risks to public health.
Moreover, the law gives public
agencies as well as civil society
the right to require a registration
review by the agriculture ministry
of any pesticide that has indicated
adverse effects to agriculture,
public health or the environment(4).
PAN, together with the regional
health ministries, has called for
the immediate reevaluation of the 12
worst actor pesticides. In El
Salvador, PAN Central America has
won a place on the National
Pesticides Commission, which is
working with the Salvadoran health
ministry to review registration of
the New Dirty Dozen.
Pesticide industry looks to trade
agreements to defend their market
for toxic pesticides
Between 1992 and 2000, pesticide
imports in Central America more than
doubled, from 18,000 to 45,000
tons(5) . Nearly all the major
agrochemical companies posted
increased sales in the region.
Moreover, as pesticide subsidies
were lifted in the 1990s, the market
for cheaper, off-patent pesticides
-- which are frequently more toxic
-- increased. WHO Class Ia and Ib
pesticides (classified as extremely
and highly hazardous respectively)
represent approximately one third of
all pesticides imported into the
Subregion, undermining the adoption
of IPM.
Agribusiness and agrochemical
corporations have tremendous
political influence around the
world, and the same holds true in
Central America, where they have
unparalleled access and influence
with national pesticide commissions
and agricultural ministries. For
example in Nicaragua the current
Minister of Agriculture, who has
great authority over pesticide
registration, is a former president
of the Nicaraguan agrochemical
industry association, ANIFODA, the
local Crop Life group. Free trade
agreements have become the key
forums in which industry promotes
global deregulation. Under the guise
of eliminating "non-tariff barriers
to trade" free trade accords like
the WTO, the proposed FTAA and the
proposed Central American Customs
Union are imposing international
standards that have been
"harmonized" to the lowest common
denominator and capricious
"equivalency" standards on countries
around the world.
Harmonization is the name used by
corporations and trade agreements
for the process of replacing
democratically adopted
national-level health, environmental
or food safety standards with
uniform international standards
generated in international forums
with strong industry representation.
These standards then become the only
trade-legal standard, or the only
standard a country can enforce
without risking trade sanctions for
"technical barriers to trade." Since
trade agreements carry strong
enforcement mechanisms, they have a
dramatic and chilling effect on
national regulation. For example,
Japan lowered 1,500 pesticide
residue standards in the late 1990s
because Japanese standards were
stronger than the trade-legal Codex,
the international food standards of
the WTO.
The concept of equivalence in trade
agreements means that different
countries' regulations or standards
-- even with distinctly different
levels of public health protection
-- can be declared equivalent. For
example, a bilateral trade agreement
declared U.S. and Australian meat
inspection systems equivalent, even
though government agents inspect
meat in the U.S., while in Australia
the meat industry itself carries out
the inspections.
The Unified Pesticide Registry
proposed within the Central American
Customs Union is basically an
equivalency agreement. The Unified
Registry would arbitrarily declare
the various Central American
national pesticide registration laws
and processes as equivalent -- even
though they provide very different
levels of health protection -- so
that once registered in one country,
a pesticide can circulate freely in
all the countries that are members
of the Union.
The proposed Registry is an
effective way for the pesticide
industry to circumvent the stronger
pesticide law in Nicaragua that
gives the health ministry and civil
society a role in pesticide
registration. Companies will be able
to go to another country, such as
Guatemala which is a regional center
for pesticide formulation and has a
very weak pesticide law, and
register their product for the whole
region. The Registry will also
undermine the possibility of
adopting new, national level bans in
the future. Even if one country bans
a product, if it is registered in
another country in the Customs
Union, the pesticide will be allowed
to circulate freely. Because the
Customs Union will do away with
border inspections, countries such
as Nicaragua, which has virtually no
ability to monitor the sales of
pesticides, will be unable to
enforce its pesticide restrictions.
Protect public health, not
corporate profits
PAN Central America and the health
sectors of the Central American
countries are demanding that any
regional trade agreement be crafted
to strengthen health and
environmental protections for all
Central Americans, not to support
the sales or profit of the
agrochemical industry.
Members of the Nicaraguan health
ministry for example, have "crashed
the party" attending the Customs
Unions negotiations in order to
voice opposition to the Unified
Pesticide Registry. Health
ministries throughout the region
have also formally asked to be
included in their nation's
delegation to the negotiations.
PAN Central America has worked to
educate the press about the threat
to public health and democracy
presented by the Unified Pesticide
Registry. PAN has developed an
alternative citizens' proposal for
regional integration that would
ensure that health and environmental
standards are strengthened in every
country as a condition of entrance
into the Customs Union. Key points
of the proposal include: full
participation by the health and
environment ministries in the
negotiations; adoption of the most
health protective standards in the
region, such as the Nicaraguan
pesticide law, as the minimum
requirement for all countries in the
Customs Union; no limitation on
sovereign rights of governments to
adopt stricter standards or new
pesticide bans in the future
including regulations based on the
precautionary principle. PAN Central
America is also campaigning for
public access to all Customs Union
and all other trade agreements
negotiating documents; the
harmonization of all pesticide bans
in the region; and the banning the
New Dirty Dozen -- the 12 pesticides
that cause the most poisonings --
throughout Central America.
Although the pesticide industry
hasn't responded publically to PAN,
the campaign has definitely caught
their attention. PAN documents
turned up as an agenda item at the
last Customs Union negotiating
session, and the industry
organization, Crop Life recently
offered a PAN staff member a
lucrative job.
PAN and the health sector in Central
America are committed to addressing
the pesticide problem. After decades
of public health investigation, a
key step in solving the pesticide
crisis has become clear -- ban the
12 products responsible for the
great majority of poisonings. The
industry is trying to subvert the
national laws that could achieve
this public health goal by inserting
the profoundly anti-democratic
provision, the Unified Pesticide
Registry, into the Central American
Customs Union. However, the unique
coalition of public health and civil
society members in Central America
has redoubled efforts to scrub the
Unified Pesticide Registry from the
Customs Union agreement, and to win
the key pesticide bans that can
address the pesticide crisis in the
region.
Erika Rosenthal, is the Legal
Advisor for Pesticide Action Network
Latin America.
Pesticide Action Network Latin
America (Red de Acción en
Plaguicidas y sus Alternativas en
América Latina) RAPAL, phone (510)
550 6752, email
erosenthal@earthjustice.org.
Notes
1The industry participated
through the Central American
Crop Life associations, ANIFODA,
APA and AGRIQUIMA.
2The RESSCAD resolution requests
the appropriate ministries in
each country to "…restrict the
use of the 12 pesticides
…recognized as responsible for
the largest number of poisonings
and deaths [in] the Subregion."
3 Ley No. 274 de Nicaragua, LEL
Basica Para La Regulacion Y
Control De Plaguicidas,
Sustancias Toxicas, Peligrosas Y
Otras Similares (1998).
4 Arto. 60, Ley 274. "La
Autoridad de Aplicación someterá
a reevaluación técnica las
sustancias químicas…y productos
formulados registrados cuando
existan indicadores de efectos
adversos a la actividad
agropecuaria sostenida, la salud
humana y el ambiente en
general…."
5 OPS/OMS - PLAGSALUD,
Plaguicidas Salud en el Istmo
Centroamericano, 2000.
Email:
panna@panna.org. Phone (415)
981-1771.
This page is http://www.panna.org/node/
displayed on 10/14/09
Page and Web site © 2008 by
Pesticide Action Network North
America (PANNA).
|