d eToledo R.F.

Giatti L.

Jacobi P.R.

Ambiente & sociedade

English

Repositorio da Producao Cientifica e Intelectual da Unicamp

EDITORIAL 19-3
A REFLECTION OPPOSING THE MASSIFICATION OF 
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION
This new volume of Ambiente & Sociedade brings 14 articles comprising a diversity 
of topics: agroecology and its multiple polysemies, environmental education practices, en-
vironmental behavior of university students, ecosystems and vulnerability, coastal tourism, 
development-aimed public policy, environmentalism and information and communication 
networks, agrochemical control policy, and water rationing strategies.
We touch issues which are on the spotlight of the environmental agenda in every 
volume; this time, we chose the problem of food production enhancement technologies 
and how they increase the risk to the environment and human health.
These days have glyphosate again creating controversy. Pointed out as carcinoge-
nic, the herbicide that is responsible for removing weeds in crops controls more than half 
the global herbicide market. Now this debate involves the World Health Organization 
(WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the 
European Union, and the United States of America.
Recent studies even show that glyphosate is possibly the biggest factor in the 
development of highly prevailing diseases in western societies, such as autism, ADHD, 
Alzheimer, and cancer. 
The innumerous impacts derived from the emergence of agrochemicals and their 
intensive use have intensified the unease. After the second halve of the 20th century, 
new technologies associated with the green revolution boosted the food production ca-
pacity, promoting environmental and health risks. More recently, since the second green 
revolution –that of GMOs, risks have been magnified considerably, and characterized 
especially by uncertainty.
Since 2008 Brazil has become the greatest consumer of agrochemicals, overtaking 
the United States, and also taking the leadership in the world market of these products. 
22 out of 50 of the pesticides which are used in the country are banned in the EU or even 
in countries home to the producing companies.
The use of agrochemicals in Brazil is mainly related to export crops, such as soy, 
cotton, sugar cane, tobacco, and some fruits, all of them within the agribusiness model. 
However, we cannot underestimate the use that is given by family agriculture, producing 
a big share of fruits and vegetables for national consumption.
According to the National Agency for Sanitary Vigilance (ANVISA in Portuguese), 
19% of the global production of pesticides is used in Brazil. Agrochemicals pollute the soil, 
the air, underground and surface freshwater, affecting every living being and impacting 
upon the entire food chain. In a recent special publication by the Brazilian Collective 
Health Association (ABRASCO in Portuguese), throughout 2015 the average Brazilian 
person consumed 7.36 liters of agrochemicals. The last ANVISA report, in 2013, showed 
that 78% of the collected food samples were contaminated with agrochemicals, while 36% 
of them tested positive for unauthorized substances and/or higher traces concentrations 
than what is accepted. Furthermore, research published in 2011 by the Brazilian Institute 
of Geography and Statistics (IBGE in Portuguese) revealed that freshwater pollution by 
pesticides and fertilizers is already the second highest, only behind contamination by 
household sewage.
Let’s recall what Rachel Carson already warned us back in 1962, in her book Silent 
Spring. She showed how DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) could cause cancer 
in human beings and interfered in the wildlife wellbeing, increasing mortality among 
birds. Carson even compared the effect of DDT sprayings with that of atomic bombs. 
Numerous studies demonstrated how the pesticide eradicated many harmless insects 
which were essential to the ecosystems; it was even associated with the near extinction 
of the pilgrim falcon.
The author also spoke against the distorted rationality of the process leading 
humans into seeking immediate answers, yet with severe long-term consequences, and 
irresponsibly giving institutional support to the chemistry industry. The claim was based 
especially on the lack of knowledge on the impact of the synthetic products used in cities 
and farming activities, as well as the absence of studies analyzing their effects. At that 
time, insecticides were considered extremely selective –therefore regarded as “safe”, since 
they allegedly acted upon harmful organisms only. This was later refuted and exposed in 
Silent Spring and posterior studies.
The evocative title of the book makes reference to the silence of the birds and 
insects, which were devastated by the used of biocides, as named for the first time. The 
book pictures a fictional city stricken by environmental damage, diagnosed by the au-
thor over time. According to her, the fictional city is a compendium of existing ones, for 
example, the use of DDT during the Second World War to eliminate disease vectors in 
combat areas.
The concept of insecticide biomagnification, that is to say, the substance’s buildup 
and potentiation throughout the food chain, is also portrayed in the book. DDT is sprayed 
on crops and runs off into water bodies, where it is absorbed by small algae. Algae are 
then consumed by small invertebrates and tiny fish, later consumed by bigger fish and 
birds, increasing the pollutant’s concentration every time, for it accumulates itself in fat 
tissue. Ultimately, DDT concentrations in the highest trophic level are lethally high and 
even threaten some species with extinction. 
Ten years after Silent Spring was published, the domestic production of DDT in 
the U.S.A. was forbidden, along with the creation of the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency. On May 23rd, 2001, 122 countries signed the Stockholm convention on persis-
tent organic pollutants (POPs), aiming to phase out a list of 12 initial toxic substances, 
including DDT.
Risks multiply themselves, especially environmental and technological ones with 
severe consequences; they are key factors for understanding the characteristics, limits 
and transformations of the uncertain modernity and the industrial system. And society, 
creator of risks, becomes increasingly thoughtful, autocritical, acknowledging the risks 
behind the perils generated by society, and thus reacts to them.  
Reflexivity allows us to acknowledge “manufactured uncertainties”, which are 
those created by the very own development of science and technology, result of human 
intervention in nature (Giddens, 1991, 1994). This enables anyone, no matter what 
context they are embedded in, to be able to appreciate the side effects associated with 
science and technology.
Since the 1990s, research has started recognizing the uncertainties related to those 
risks derived from chemical contaminants in diet, especially agrochemicals, mad-cow 
disease and avian flu, and GMOs. More recently, the refinement of analytical methods 
supports the evidence of the presence of micropollutants in food, biological samples, and 
even in humans, in concentrations as low as parts per billion or trillion. Nonetheless, 
there are still doubts regarding the risk level of a great variety of pollutants that we are 
in contact with, and the possibility of synergy among them.
GMOs represent a relatively new branch of research (genetic engineering); agro-
chemicals manufacturers create seeds which are resistant to their own pesticides, or even 
seeds producing insecticide plants. This GMO- and pesticide-based agricultural model is 
a clear example of the practices which are threatening the future of soils and agricultural 
biodiversity.
GMOs comprise a double risk, by their very nature of being genetically modified 
material, and by the intensification of the use of agrochemicals. Given their resistance 
to pesticides, the continuous use of transgenic seeds favors the resistance of weeds and 
harmful insects as well, which in turn leads the farmer to increase the dosage every time. 
It is not by chance that Brazil has become the world leader in agrochemicals consumption 
in 2008, after ten years of growing GMOs. More than half of the amount is used on soy, 
the first transgenic crop introduced in Brazil. In addition, the use of GMOs represents a 
high risk of biodiversity loss.
Amongst the social-environmental impacts, transgenic seeds spawn living beings 
that have the capacity of dispersion and multiplication within the environment. The 
contamination of non-GMO crops has been subject of important discussions for the 
present and future of food productions, and for the nations’ food security and sovereignty.
The global dissemination of GMOs has been characterized by the lack of scientific 
accuracy or dialogue with society, and there is no consent within the scientific community 
on the safety of GMOs to the human health or the environment.
The response capacity in face of this crisis must emerge from society as a whole, 
and from its power to become reflexive. Although not quite significant yet, the interest 
and search for organic foods and permaculture goes in that direction. Frequently, those 
who choose other production systems are, likewise, concerned with the planet’s health 
and with their own as well. For this trend to continue, it is critical to have growing 
transparency as for food commercialization, thus evincing how important it is to be able 
to identify GMOs within the market.
The article “Agroecology: polysemy, pluralism and controversies” by Luiz Antonio 
Norder, Claire Lamine, Stephane Bellon and Alfio Brandenburg, analyses the peculiarities 
of agroecology in science, social movements, education, and government policies, based 
on the Brazilian and French experience.
Authors Laila Sandroni and Maria José Carneiro survey the production in social 
sciences dealing with environments where the conservation of biodiversity is a central 
aspect to the research. They pinpoint some bibliographical trends and knowledge gaps 
in the article “Biodiversity Conservation” in Brazilian social sciences: a systematic review 
from 1992 to 2010”.
In an attempt to identify the stakeholders’ perceptions and expectations about the 
contribution of third sector organizations to environmental education, authors Virgínia 
Talaveira Valentini Tristão and José Americo Martelli Tristão use the Delphi method 
to identify the way this happens as a new pedagogical proposal. The article is called 
“The contribution of NGOs in environmental education: na evaluation od stakeholders 
perception”.
Aiming to clarify the strategies used by the media to greenwash ethanol production, 
Wendell Ficher Teixeira Assis analyses advertising sponsored by the sugar-cane sector 
through the main media outlets, as well as those published by the European Union and 
United States press in the article “Media justifications: strategies for environmentalization 
of ethanol production through advertising”.
In the paper called “Local benefits of the Atlantic Forest: evidences from rural 
communities in Southern Brazil”, the authors Gisele Garcia Alarcon, Alfredo Celso Fantini 
and Carlos H. Salvador sought to understand how rural producers perceive the role of 
the forest as keeper of environmental services, through the study of these communities 
and the application of surveys.
By means of a comparative study, Pedro Luiz Côrtes, António Guerner Dias, Maria 
Eduarda da Silva Teixeira Fernandes and Jorge Manuel Vieira Pamplona examined univer-
sity students’ behavior before environmental matters, observing what factors influenced 
their speech, stance, and options. “Environmental behavior: a comparative study between 
Brazilian and Portuguese students” is the name of the article.
A field survey and vulnerability index analysis were the tools that Luana Portz, João 
Pedro De Moura Jardim, Rogério Portantiolo Manzolli and Nelson Sambaqui Gruber used 
to identify the factors that contributed the most to the degradation of the frontal dunes 
at the seafront in Capão da Canoa, RS, Brazil, and reported it in their article “Impacts 
on the dunes system: natural dynamic versus anthropogenic interference”.
“Public policies development: convergences and divergences in the Bodoquena-
-Pantanal Geopark” is an article by Maria Cristiane Fernandes da Silva Lunas, Ademir 
Kleber Morbeck de Oliveira and Vera Lúcia Ramos Bononi. They looked at both the 
implicit and explicit objectives of public policies aimed to implement the Geopark from 
a regional development perspective.
The authors Plínio Guimarães de Sousa, Esdras Matheus Matias and Vanice Santiago 
Fragoso Selva mapped real estate touristic projects in trying to identify their impacts on the 
Brazilian north-eastern coast and contrasting them with their environmental discourses. 
They report it in their article “From residential tourism to tourist real estate complexes: the 
appropriation of the coastal zone in the Northeast of Brazil by tourist real estate activities”.
By means of mapping the CDM activities and projects approved by the national 
Interministry Commission on Global Climate Change, the article “CDM projects in Brazil: 
Market opportunity for companies and new designated operational entities” by Camila 
Torres, Ricardo K.S. Fermam and Isabel Sbragia identifies opportunities for the entry of 
new certifying companies into the national CDM market.
In presenting the history of the creation of the Federal Law on agrochemicals pro-
duction, commerce, and use control in Brazil, the article “(De)constructing the political 
agenda of control over pesticides in Brazil”  retrieves the environmentalist movements’ 
participation and analyses the main attempts of deconstruction and weakening of those 
laws. Authors: Caroline da Rocha Franco and Victor Pelaez.
Sonia Aguiar, Iargo de Souza Santos, Nayara Arêdes and Sóstina Silva take ne-
tworks composed by environmentalist organizations and social movements concerned 
with the protection of Brazilian biomes, and discuss about the organizational structures 
and informational and communication resources they use to reach their goals. You can 
read about it in “Biome-networks: information and communication for sociopolitical 
action in eco-regions”.
“Contribution to the study of measures for the reduction of apparent water loss in 
urban areas” is the name of the article written by Cristina Mendes Silva, Valter Lúcio de 
Pádua and Jorge Martins Borges, in which they evaluate how substituting hydrometers 
could be an alternative when needing efficiency improvements by the public supply 
service providers.
Authors Sílvia Laine Borges, Ludivine Eloy, Isabel Belloni Schmidt, Ana Carolina 
Sena Barradas and Ivanilton Almeida dos Santos, in their work “Fire management in 
Veredas (Palm Swamps): New perspectives on traditional farming systems in Jalapão, 
Brazil”, studied the ways in which traditional fire use fosters vegetation maintenance and 
contributes to the process of natural ecological succession.
We wish you all a pleasant reading. 
Pedro Roberto Jacobi
Editor-in-Chief, Ambiente & Sociedade Journal 
Professor, Education School, University of São Paulo 
Professor, Graduate Program in Environmental Science, University of São Paulo
Leandro Giatti
Adjoint Editor, Ambiente & Sociedade Journal 
Associate professor, Environmental Health Department, Public Health Faculty, 
University of São Paulo.
Renata Ferraz de Toledo
Adjoint Editor, Ambiente & Sociedade Journal 
Professor and tutor, MSc Program in Environment, Health, and Sustainability, 
Public Health Faculty, University of São Paulo.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-4422ASOCeditorialV1932016  


A Reflection Opposing The Massification Of Agricultural Production

http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/bitstream/REPOSIP/323975/2/2-s2.0-84992677799eng.pdf

A Reflection Opposing The Massification Of Agricultural Production

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Repositorio da Producao Cientifica e Intelectual da Unicamp