Resumen de Comparative agroecological analysis between north american and european regulations on plant protection products, and their consequences in latin america
This article is based on a former research of a Ph.D. thesis, performed during three years (2011-13) at the Institute of Rural Sociology and Peasants Studies of the University of Cordoba, Spain.
The purpose of this research was to evaluate the suitability of regulations on plant protection products in two different economic blocks (the European Union and the United States of America, in regards to needs and perceptions of those individuals (agrarian producers and other agents) affected by them. These data were contrasted with the derived effects of these regulations on the producers and their ecosystems in Latin America.
The approach was based on the multidisciplinary paradigm of Agroecology. It tried to value and show those aspects that are not present and not captured by these regulations. The study was a comparative analysis between environmental regulations of these economic blocks and their safety impacts.
The main techniques used for data collection were semi-structured surveys, revision of secondary sources and Delphi analysis. In the last part, some research results were shown, trying to verify the hypothesis, from the matching of data and insights.
In the case of Latin America, the main focus was put into the destructive relationship in both the local communities and their environment, based on the use of one of the most common agrotoxics: Glyphosate and its derivate products. A brief deepening was done into the knowledge of those agrochemicals related to cropping of soybean. This will establish the components of exchange of these products in the world chains of trade and the consequent economic networks that sustain them. It will be continued with a study of the consequences for the populations affected in Latin America, and for their agroecosystems.
Finally, the thesis provided a step toward the opinions of producers and experts on these issues, trying to verify hypotheses from the coincidence of data and opinions. The article concludes with a summary of recommendations to improve and influence future regulations and ecological and political agendas.
