Organic and Synthetic Pest Control in Oaxaca: Benefits and Hardships

 

Why this topic? 

Before arriving in Oaxaca, I had recently finalized my decision to become an Environmental Science major, despite the tough course load and math-dependent classes that come along with it. I chose this, and all its downsides, because I wanted to challenge myself as well as address growing environmental concerns in my own country and abroad. Upon arriving in Oaxaca, I found plenty of opportunities to observe environmental issues that interested me–water pollution and scarcity, soil erosion, and deforestation, among other things. It was a tough decision but I eventually chose my current topic based on the wide-spread effects that pesticides have on the environment and other living things in addition to the lack of regulation and knowledge of their use. Because of the wealth of locally produced food in Oaxaca (using both organic and synthetic pest control) and the multiple produce vendors within walking distance, this topic is not only interesting, but easily carried out. Thus, while exploring my own interest in environmental issues through the University, I will also be able to explore this topic on an international scale in the beautiful and bountiful city of Oaxaca, Mexico.

 

Study Question: What is the appeal of using pesticides or organic pest control techniques on produce and how do they benefit/harm the lives of those consuming them?

 

A Little History:

     Upon first visit to one of the many mercados scattering Oaxaca city, a first-timer may be overwhelmed by the sheer number and variety of products sold there: quesillo, carrots, papaya, rosemary, guava, bouquets of flowers, chapulines and much more. Though many of the piles of different crops are usually unlabeled with details of their origin, it is assumed that most of these crops are from local farms, or at least within a reasonable vicinity of the city.  

     In the United States, this process of buying produce is more formalized and shrouded in guarantees and elaborately decorated stickers depicting women with fruit baskets hovering above their heads.  Walking along the aisles of produce in a supermarket one may be surrounded by oranges shipped from Florida or corn from Iowa or even papaya from Mexico. Though these are two different presentations of the same food, it is very likely that they both have a similar way of cultivating these goods: pesticides, fungicides and insecticides.

     In both countries, finding food without these chemicals is usually separated by an entire adjective and price.  Organic usually refers to crops that have been cultivated using natural deterrents of insects, rodents or fungus–namely derivatives from other plants like crysanthemums, marigolds or other plants.  With the development of other, more effective, chemicals to ward off these pests, the production of “organically” grown crops was phased out after the development of pesticides.  However, in more recent years, the negative effects that these chemicals had on the health of many who came into contact with them was realized and a movement toward sustainable and organically grown food gained more ground.  

In Mexican farms, the use of pesticides still plays a great role in the production of fruits and vegetables, which are then exported to different states or countries that have great demand for these types of crops (Hufbaur 2005).  However, there has been controversy surrounding this topic for decades and they continue to play a major role in the lives of both Mexican farmworkers and consumers which have dealt with the adverse effects of the chemicals.  Here, the history of pesticide use, the regulations surrounding them, the effects of their use and the practice of using more natural pesticides for growing crops will be discussed on an international, historical and cultural scale. 

     Throughout the history of agriculture there is also a history of trying to tame the insect, weeds, and other pests that may have caused crop yields to plummet.  With the transition of nomadic to settled lifestyles among humans nearly 10,000 years ago, agricultural practices began to develop as humans tried to live off the land.  This first began in the Fertile Crescent of Mesopotamia or modern day Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Turkey where farmers cultivated various crops and livestock for consumption (Unsworth 2010).  As time went on, this type of lifestyle became more in more common and evidence of this has been found in China, areas of Africa, and three regions in South America, where corn, squash, potato and sunflower became commonly grown. 

     Inevitably, pests and diseases would result in lower crop yields that would cause starvation or illness among the farmers communities thus prompting early agriculturalists to discover new ways to control these pests.  It is likely that pesticides and other chemicals were the result of farmer’s desire for higher crop yields and fewer diseases among their plants.  

The first pesticides were thought to be used by Sumarian farmers of northern Jordan who used sulphur compounds to control insect populations and mites around 2500 B. C. E.  In more recent history, the Romans used a similar method of burning sulfur to kill insects and salt to kill weeds and other organisms in their farmland (Organic Pesticides 2008).  These two forms of pesticides at the time–direct (salt and sulfur compounds) and indirect (smoke)–were developed later on and many other ingredients were used to kill or deter insects and other pests (namely blight and fungi) from growing.  Examples of this include the burning of flammable and “fragrant” materials such as straw, corn husks, hedge clippings, crabs, fish, animal waste and animal horns among other things.  Plant extracts like those of lupine and wild cucumber were also applied to plants as pesticides nearly 2000 years ago and these discoveries were brought back to Europe from the Middle East during exploration (Smith 1975).  During the 19th century, farmers and scientists began testing with more natural techniques and applied chemicals derived from the roots of tropical vegetables and chrysanthemum flowers (Miller 2002).  

     Before the 1940’s many inorganic pesticides were in already in use such as sodium chlorate, sulfuric acid, nitrophenols, chlorophenols and petroleum oils.  However, farmers encountered problems with these forms of substances because they lacked specificity to a particular pest, often were toxic to the plants and other plants they were applied to and also required high levels of application during the growing season. During the late 1930‘s and1940’s, however, the pesticide industry began to advance with the creation of new chemical compounds like aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, chlordane, parathion, captan, 2,4-D, BHC and DDT (Unsworth 2010).  Dichloro–Diphenyl–Trichloroethane (DDT) was one of the most effective pesticides at the time (Pesticides 2009) and was discovered in 1939 by Dr.  Paul Muller who later received the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his finding. The insecticide was widely used during urban and aerial sprayings (Pesticides 2009, Unsworth 2010) and, with few apparent toxic effects on animals or humans, reduced the number of disease-carrying insects like mosquitos and other crop-harming insects.  During its use, there was a marked drop in the frequency of insect-borne diseases like typhoid, malaria, and typhus.  However, as time wore on, the negative effects of the popular pesticide became more apparent.  For example, in 1946, resistances of the chemical by the common house fly were reported as well as widespread health problems and other negative effects on “non-target” plants and animals that were believed to be associated with its application.  Though policy makers in the 1950’s were not overly concerned with the effects of DDT and other pesticides on human health (Unsworth 2010), nearly twenty two years later health and ecological concerns led to its ban by 86 different countries (Pesticides 2009).  Among these concerns were the growing number of preterm births and environmental hazards including behavioral abnormalities and thinning of eggshells in bald eagles and peregrine falcons (Synthetic Pesticides) which were once listed as endangered species because of the pesticide.  

     Though in most of the world the pesticide has been banned, DDT can still be detected in the environment and in the blood of citizens whose country phased out the chemical decades ago (Melesio 2010).  The same holds true for many other pesticides and most are known as POPs or Persistent Organic Pollutants.  These pollutants persist in natural environments by accumulating in the fatty tissues of animals and people alike that come into contact with them and bioaccumulate in animals and food chains causing high-levels of exposure.  They also have the ability to travel long distances from their point of release either from bioaccumulation or especially well-dispersing pesticides and other chemicals. 

These POPs can cause cancer and another diseases and can wreak havoc on  reproductive and immune systems within the body, effecting the developmental process in young humans or animals who are especially susceptible to their effects.  In the past three decades, measures have been taken on a global scale to reduce the use of these POPs in meetings like the Stockholm Convention (Morner 2002). 

     In many countries, however, the use of such pesticides were not banned in farms until comparatively later than most, though many have suffered from effects of these chemicals in the past (Melesio 2010).  For example, as of 2010 many Latin American children still have DDT present in their blood even after the establishment of bans in their respective countries, according to the Pan American Health Organization.  In rural communities of 7 Mesoamerican countries including Mexico, there was still evidence of DDT. However, in Guatemala there was absolutely no trace of the pesticide in children tested which the researcher who conducted the survey had attributed this to the fact that the country was one of the first to ban the chemical after studies depicting it’s negative effects were released in 1979.  Other countries tested were not quite as diligent with the phase-out of the chemical (especially Mexico) and the persistent chemical has remained in the blood of their children well above internationally accepted rates.  “In Mexico, the levels were from nine to 28 times higher than in other countries. ‘This is because Mexico was the last country to stop using DDT,’  said San Luis Potosi, who led the research, published in the journal Chemosphere. ” It was not until 2000 that Mexico eradicated its last official supplies from the country (Melesio 2010) though government officials had continued to spray in malaria afflicted areas until 1997 despite the long-term effects previously mentioned (Sandoval 2002) and the fact that “the half-life spans decades. ” In addition, some rural communities continue to use DDT in both farms meant for self-sustaining and export purposes (Melesio 2010). 

     In Mexico’s history of pesticide use, it has not had a strong reputation as a country with much regulation of its use.  If this previously mentioned case could not attest to this lack of regulation compared to other South American countries, Mexico has had a history of farmers affected by pesticidal chemicals and poor response to these cases (Melesio 2010, Sandoval 2002, Piña 2004).  In 1986, the World Health Organization estimated there were at least 14,000 cases of pesticide related fatalities in the fields of the Third World and around 750,000 nonfatal poisonings (Wright 1986).  Shortly before this time in 1970, agriculture accounted for 25% of the country’s GDP with a high percentage of Mexicans in the workforce (Hufbaur 2005, United States).  Despite the knowledge surrounding pesticides around this time and the number of farm workers in Mexico using DDT, very little was done to improve this statistic (Hufbaur 2005, Abler 1995).  However, during the 21st century, there has been a movement to change environmental regulations and to reduce the quantity of pesticides in its agricultural sector (Lotter 2005, Regulation 2010).  Those still in use are governed by a number of overlapping laws and regulations that fall under the jurisdiction of six different regulatory agencies each with specific guidelines as to the transport, use, and effects of chemical substances on the environment and health of consumers.  In addition, all pesticides must be registered and meet the requirements established by the General Bureau of Environmental Health (Summary 2003).  

Rocio Alatorre Eden-Wynter, federal commissioner with COFEPRIS, Mexico’s pesticide regulatory and approval agency, announced Mexico’s plan to introduce a new organic program in 2011 (Regulation 2010).  Though there has been no formal announcement of this program, the number of organic exports produced in Mexico and shipped elsewhere are growing compared to decades past.  With nearly 100,000 hectares of certified organic land, Mexico places 16th in the world and fifth in Latin America (Lotter 2005).  

     Though there is a relatively small demand for organic food in Mexico, the rate of production is growing as international demand increases; in 2007 the United States imported 1. 8 million metric tons of fruit from Mexico and this number is expected to grow in years to come (Organics 2011).  Because many of its organic exports must follow the guidelines of other countries, namely the United States, it uses little or no synthetic pesticides to cultivate its produce (Organics 2011, Organic Insecticides).  This is, obviously, much less harmful to the health of its cultivators due to the low frequency of pesticides used on the fruits and vegetables.  In addition, the idea of “organic” food in Mexican households is beginning to change.  “Mexico is now considered the second [most] obese country in the world and the Mexican government has made it a priority to reverse this through education campaigns and new food nutrition laws targeting school children (United States 2011).” This new nutritional education program centers around organic versus conventional food products (United States 2011).  

     With the advancement of pesticides over the course of agricultural history, there has come to be extensive knowledge and numerous regulations surrounding agricultural chemicals through trial and error and human ingenuity. Mexico, having an economy historically based on its agriculture industry (Miller 2002), has taken part in the use and development of regulations (however flawed) of pesticides and, more recently, made an effort to reduce their use.

 

Plan of Action:

Interviews:

One effective way I have found to collect more information on this topic is through interviews with local producers, namely those that sell in markets like the weekly Organic market or the daily market just behind the Zocalo in 20 de Noviembre. This allows for more personal interactions between organic farmers and those using synthetic pesticides for their fruit. After interviewing 3 different producers in the weekly organic market, I have come to the following conclusions (there are more to come!):

• Most of the vendors at the market are also the producers and come from small, outlying towns to bring their items to market
• The organic sector mainly sells to tourists, infrequently to locals 
• Most use "aromatic herbs" instead of pesticides like onion, garlic, and chile

 

In order to discover the effects this might have on the "wallets" of local Oaxacans, I intend to interview consumers of market produce including my own host family (and possibly others) and urban gardeners who strive to produce their own food.

 

Visits:

During our program, we have visited many farms that do not use or only very little amounts of synthetic pest control but I have not formally visited one. This is on my checklist: to observe at least one (preferably two) farms that produce and sell agricultural products using natural or synthetic pesticides.

 

Research:

Though there is much to learn from the producers themselves, I feel there is also information obtainable through simple research of the topic. I intend to further research current methods of regulation of pesticides by the government of Mexico and history pertaining more specifically to the state of Oaxaca.

 

Accomplished and To Do:

 

February 25: Finish Research paper on Pesticides

February 26: Go to Teotítlan and work in Huerto

March 10: Interviews with 3 vendors at Organic Market

April 11: Go to Organic Store and interview owner Yu'hniz

April 12: Interview Magdalena and Hilberto

April 13: Interview Cara Smiley, Organic Certifier in Mexico

April 14: PRESENT!

 

I have decided to present my project with a simple Powerpoint presentation and a discussion so I am able to detail the history of pesticides and present photos of the markets I've visited and the effects pesticides have had on the Mexican and Oaxacan population.

 

Reflection:

This experience has been one I will never forget. I had the opportunity to dig into a culture deeply connected to its environment since pre-hispanic times and interview those who have purposely taken a more costly avenue of production and selling to protect their environment and their offspring from the harmful effects that pollutants, like pesticides, can have. Even in the United States, these sentiments are hard to find (maybe not in Vermont but I digress). In talking with local Oaxacan store owners, farmers, and organic certifiers, I gathered information for my independent project.

    In Oaxaca, I had the chance to begin to understand the meaning of "organic" outside the United States and in the Oaxacan markets and stores where people produce and sell their own food without the use of chemicals. From the study I found that most producers use pesticides because it is significantly more cheap and the produce grows much faster and larger than those cultivated using organic pesticides. This is so because most organic producers grow their own pesticides (chiles, onions, garlic, cilantro etc.). More reasoning as to why synthetic pesticides are used is that their is little knowledge of the health effects that they can have though there are a few governmental programs to teach these effects and transition from synthetic to organic pesticides. In addition, most organic products are too expensive for lower class citizens and are usually bought by middle to upper class Oaxacans and foreigners. Thus, the market for organic food is significantly smaller than its chemically-treated counterpart. However, through research and talking among producers and sellers of organic products, there has been a movement growing in the past 10-20 years that has included increased interest in organic food production throughout Mexico and Oaxaca. Like the United States, this process of transitioning to organically grown food is slow but is tangible among the people of Oaxaca who have such strong feelings towards the environment and who have also been growing and selling there for most of their lives.

     During my study of the use and local understanding of pesticides, I faced some hard challenges along the way. Namely, the language barrier that I encountered when talking to nearly all of my interviewees. This resulted in miscommunication and unclear answers that didn't really fit the question I was trying to ask. After a few interviews, I altered and refined my questions as best I could though in my final interviews there were still some discrepancies about what I was trying to ask, though much less frequent than when I had first started. In contrast, I had a few aspects of the project that were surprisingly different than how I thought it would be. For one, nearly everyone I talked to was friendly and willing to answer my questions, waiting for me to form the right words and patiently answering even though they may have been busy at the time. The patience of the people that I interviewed surprised me simply because I knew how impatient I would have been in the same situation. Another thing that surprised me was the sentiments most had about the environment; they really valued all that it provides despite the common disregard of other citizens throughout the city in the form of trash or other pollutants. In coming years, it is my belief that this will change and that the majority of people will posses knowledge of the importance of the environment like so many of those I spoke to seemed to have. In this way, the organic movement in Oaxaca will teach younger generations and extranjeros about the environment and how to preserve it for future generations, maintaining the integrity and beauty of Oaxaca's biodiverse countryside. As before stated, this will take time but eventually be realized.

     This entire experience has been wonderful, nerve-wracking, and inspirational during this 3.5 month span of time. Though I had a hard time choosing a topic that truly inspired me, I believe I chose the right one. I know I will return to the U.S with eyes wide open the next time I visit a farmer's market in Burlington, ever comparing it to the organic Pochote market I visited for the last time just yesterday. After speaking to numerous people over the course of my independent study that I would be able to take the information I learned here, and apply it to the all too similar community atmosphere in Burlington and make comparisons to all the future farmer's markets and agricultural projects I may attend in coming years. 

 

10 point quality indicator:

I have decided to give myself a 9.5 out of 10 for in-depthness (if that's a word) and determination (the whole language thingy). Though my project evolved throughout the process of interviewing, I tried my hardest to set up interviews with people I knew would be able to give me the information I would need to answer my study question. In the beginning of the program I knew I had overestimated my spanish and conversation abilities and had a lot of reservations about the number of interviews I would have to do in order to collect information for my project. However, by the end, I grew much more comfortable with this aspect of the project and could go into interviews with only a few questions and come up with more as I spoke with my interviewees. In addition, I ended up doing a lot of extra research about the topic that wasn't included in my presentation like Mexican-U.S economic relationships (NAFTA, organic certification) that significantly aided my understanding of the local organic movement in Oaxaca and also it has been influenced by the United States.

     I know that, even though it felt more like a chore at the time, I have learned much more from this project than can be quantified by a grade and that the usefulness of the information gathered is priceless. If this hadn't been such an independent venture, I would have had much less enthusiasm to complete it and would have, subsequently, learned less.

¡Gracias por todo!

 

Citations:

Abler, David, and Daniel Pick. "NAFTA, Agriculture, and the Environment in Mexico." American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75.3 (1995):794-98. JSTOR.      Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://www.jstor.org/pss/1243594>. 

 

Hufbauer, Gary Clyde., and Jeffrey J. Schott. NAFTA Revisited: Achievements and Challenges. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics,2005. Print. 

 

Lotter, Don. "Sizing up Organic Farming in Mexico." Rodale Institute. Newfarm.org, 31 Jan. 2005. Web. 25 Feb. 2012.       <http://newfarm.rodaleinstitute.org/international/pan-am_don/feb05/mx_organic/index.shtml>. 

 

Melesio, Lucina. "Environmental News Network." Sustainable Ecosystems and Community News: DDT Found in Children from Mexico and Central America. 18      Feb. 2010. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://www.enn.com/ecosystems/article/41028>. 

 

Miller, G.T. Living in the Environment. 12th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub., 2002. Print. 

 

Morner, Johan, Robert Bos, and Marjon Fredrix. Reducing and Eliminating the Use of Persistent Organic Pesticides - Guidance on Alternative Strategies for      Sustainable Pest and Vector Management. Geneva: IOMC, 2002. Print. 

 

"Organic Insecticides." EcoSmart. 18 Sept. 2008. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://blog.ecosmart.com/index.php/2008/09/19/the-history-of-`pesticides/>. 

 

"Organics From Mexico - Are They Safe?" Organics From Mexico: Are They Safe? GoodFood World, 2 Feb. 2011. Web. 25 Feb. 2012.      <http://www.goodfoodworld.com/2011/02/organics-from-mexico-are-they-safe/>. 

 

"Pesticides, Pesticide Use on Factory Farms." Sustainabletable. Sept. 2009. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/pesticides/>. 

 

Piña, Carlos, and Sara Forcada. "Effects of an Environmental Tax on Pesticides in Mexico." UNEP Industry and Environment (2004). Print. 

 

"The Regulation And Approval Of Pesticides In Mexico." Farm Chemicals International. 18 Aug. 2010. Web. 25 Feb. 2012.      <http://www.farmchemicalsinternational.com/news/cropprotection/?storyid=2734>. 

 

Sandoval, Ricardo. "Legacy of DDT." Latinamericanstudies.org. Dallas Morning News, 26 Feb. 2002. Web. 25 Feb. 2012.      <http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/mexico/ddt.htm>. 

 

Smith, Allan E. "Forerunners of Pesticides in Classical Greece and Rome." Agricultural and Food Chemisty 23.6 (1975): 1050. Print. 

 

"Summary of Environmental Law in Mexico." Commission for Environmental Cooperation. Sept. 2003. Web. 25 Feb. 2012.      <http://www.cec.org/lawdatabase/mx11.cfm?varlan=english>. 

 

"Synthetic Pesticides." Bacillus Thuringiensis. University of California San Diego. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://www.bt.ucsd.edu/synthetic_pesticide.html>. 

 

United States. CIA. The World Factbook. CIA. Web. 

 

United States. USDA. Foreign Agricultural Service. Organic Foods Find Growing Niche in Mexico. By Vanessa Salcido. 2011. Print. 

 

Unsworth, John. "History of Pesticide Use." Agrochemicals. International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, 10 May 2010. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. 

 

Wright, A. "Rethinking the Circle of Poison: The Politics of Pesticide Poisoning Among Mexican Farm Workers." Latin American Perspectives 13.4 (1986): 26-59. Print.