An exploration of the thematic contents of the environmental discourse in the Summit of Rio-92 reveals three main groups: nature, socioeconomic, & sociopopulational. A systematic comparison between common & specific text shows ideological ambivalence & contradictions among them. Thus, the environmentalist representations seem to be differentiated according to the emphasis on "specialized/contraspecialized" knowledge, nature/human matters, & state/civil society. It is suggested that the latest advances in research about nature have not been followed by practical social action, producing fragmentation & subordination to specialized knowledge in the environmental community. 20 Tables. Adapted from the source document.
This article focuses on the implementation of the CTEs (Territorial Farm Contracts) in French agriculture. During the left Lionel Jospin's government, this kind of contracts was created by the 1999 Agricultural Orientation Act in order to introduce changes in both the farming policy and individual strategies of farmers. Through the CTEs, farmers and public administration built a new social contract taking into account the implications of farming activities on the environment and countryside in France. Furthermore, the implementation of the CTEs opened the social debate about agriculture to new non-agricultural players (consumers, environmentalists, local authorities, forest owners…). Unfortunately, the CTEs did not receive sufficient social and economic support and could not resist the opposition from the French corporative agrarian lobby (particularly, from FNSEA and CNJA). The centre-right government abolished them in 2003 and created the current CADs (Contracts for Sustainable Agriculture). Paradoxally, the CTEs are today recovering their relevance in the framework of the new EU Regulation on Rural Development, as some European governments consider such contracts are useful to encourage farmers to assimilate the new agricultural and rural policies.
OBJECTIVE:The potential adverse effects on human health associated with pesticides used in the program of eradication of illicit crops in Colombia are controversial. From the beginning of the 80's the pesticides paraquat, triclopyr, imazapyr, glyphosate and tebuthiuron have been used in eradication programs or experimentally. The objective of this study was to identify a reasonable approach which could be adopted by public health on this problem.METHODS:A qualitative content analysis was carried out of the speeches of social actors involved in this debate, to classify them according to Suppes' expectations, or lay approach to risk. Social actors were identified by means of available documents in hard copies or on the internet; afterwards, ideally typical texts were selected and analysed.RESULTS:Skin lesions, conjunctivitis, and gastrointestinal and respiratory in-fections were identified as the most frequent illnesses. The analysis of speeches identified the affected groups as vulnerable populations. The Colombian and American governments present reports, based on the "medical model", which indicate no association between glyphosate exposure and human health. Guerrilla groups do not show a clear relationship between pesticides and effects on health; the national and international scientific communities criticize the eradication program based on concepts from ecology and the Latin American Social Medicine; environmentalist groups criticize any use of pesticides, and human right defenders point out that sprayings violate Colombian and American laws.DISCUSSION:In conclusion the different positions are opposed and none can be considered irrefutable. A rational position from the public health stand-point is to support the adoption of the precaution principle. ; OBJETIVO:Los potenciales efectos adversos sobre la salud humana por el uso de plaguicidas en el programa de erradicación de cultivos ilícitos en Colombia es un tema controversial. Desde comienzos de la década de los 80 se han usado, en programas de erradicación o experimentalmente, los plaguicidas paraquat, triclopir, imazapir, glifosato y tebutiuron. El objetivo del estudio es identificar que aproximación razonable podría adoptar la salud pública acerca de esta problemática.MÉTODOS:Se realizó un análisis cualitativo del contenido de los discursos de los actores sociales involucrados en este debate, con el fin de clasificarlos de acuerdo con las expectativas, o aproximación lega al riesgo, de Suppes. Los actores sociales fueron identificados mediante los documentos disponibles en medio físico o Internet; posteriormente, de éstos se seleccionaron y analizaron los textos ideales-típicos.RESULTADOS:Las lesiones dérmicas, conjuntivitis e infecciones gastrointestinales y respiratorias fueron identificadas como las dolencias más frecuentes. El análisis de los discursos identifica a los grupos afectados como poblaciones vulnerables; los gobiernos colombiano y estadounidense presentan informes, basados en el "modelo médico", que señalan no existir asociación entre la exposición a glifosato y salud humana; la guerrilla no señala una clara relación entre plaguicidas y efectos sobre la salud; la comunidad científica, nacional e internacional, critica el programa de erradicación con base en conceptos de la ecología y la Medicina Social Latinoamericana; los grupos ambientalistas critican cualquier uso de plaguicidas, y los defensores de derechos humanos señalan que las fumigaciones violan las leyes colombianas y estadounidenses.DISCUSIÓN:Se concluye que las diferentes posturas son irreconciliables y que ninguna puede considerarse irrefutable. Una postura razonable para la salud pública es apoyar la adopción del principio de precaución.
