2024-11-25 05:30:00
A Colombian police officer sprays glyphosate on coca fields, in Tumaco, in 2020. JUAN BARRETO / AFP
News of the week
New live. There are still places left for the first “Human Chaleur” Ideas Festival on Saturday, December 14 in Paris (or by video). You will be able to hear a series of ideas for things to do to be (finally) on the right trajectory, and also to have a time that we hope is collective, joyful and full of hope – in this not-so-fun period. You can click here to find out more and take your places – in Paris or by video.
New column. How can we prepare our schools for the heatwave? Cécile Cazenave, producer of “Chaleur humaine”, returns, in this column, to the parents who lobbied for school buildings to better adapt to global warming. You can find it here.
Question of the week
“Hello Nabil, do we know the ecological impact of drugs? Both the so-called “soft” ones and the synthetic “hard” ones? Deforestation, water consumption, chemical pollution, transport… There would be a lot to say, right? » Question asked by Brian at chaud [email protected]
My response: The ecological impact of drugs is significant, but difficult to assess precisely. Illegal drug cultivation causes localized pollution and degrades biodiversity. At the global level, the impact is much less massive than other sectors, but remains significant due to deforestation, particularly in Latin America.
(Most of the information in this response comes from the very comprehensive 2022 report from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, which you can find here.)
1. Why does drug manufacturing pollute?
Drug production and consumption first impacts agricultural production, which requires numerous pesticides and chemical fertilizers. This impact is difficult to quantify with precision: firstly, because we only have fragmentary information, but also because the diversity of impacts must be taken into account. Deforestation caused by coca cultivation in Mexico, for example, has a strong impact on biodiversity (you will find an example in this documentary on the life of Homero Gomez, defender of monarch butterflies). Another example: in the Rif region of Morocco, intensive cannabis cultivation has made this region the largest consumer of fertilizers and pesticides in the country’s entire agricultural sector – while the ecosystem of the region is already fragile, in particular because of the lack of water.
You have 61.82% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
1732519796
#ecological #impact #drugs
What are the main health concerns reported by Colombian communities exposed to glyphosate from aerial fumigation?
### Interview with Dr. Laura Gonzalez: The Complexities of Glyphosate Use in Colombia
**Interviewer**: Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Gonzalez. You are an expert on agricultural policy and environmental impact. Recently, we’ve seen increased scrutiny around the use of glyphosate in Colombia, particularly in the context of aerial fumigation of coca crops. Can you provide an overview of why this method has been employed?
**Dr. Gonzalez**: Thank you for having me. Aerial fumigation with glyphosate has been a controversial strategy used by the Colombian government for decades to control coca production, which is often linked to drug trafficking. The idea is to eradicate coca crops quickly and extensively to reduce the supply of cocaine. However, it’s important to note that this method has immense implications not only for local ecosystems but also for the communities affected by these practices.
**Interviewer**: The use of glyphosate does raise concerns about health and environmental impacts. What have communities reported regarding its effects?
**Dr. Gonzalez**: Indeed, communities that have been exposed to glyphosate report a range of negative health outcomes, from respiratory problems to skin irritations. Furthermore, these populations argue that their voices are often sidelined in discussions about the chemical’s safety. Communities impacted by aerial spraying are essential stakeholders and should be considered experts on their own experiences and conditions[[1](https://hir.harvard.edu/aerial-fumigation-in-colombia-the-bad-and-the-ugly/)].
**Interviewer**: Could you expand on how glyphosate spraying affects the environment, particularly with respect to biodiversity and soil health?
**Dr. Gonzalez**: Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum herbicide that not only targets coca plants but can also harm surrounding flora and fauna. This indiscriminate nature can lead to a decrease in local biodiversity as non-target species are affected. Moreover, repeated use can degrade soil health over time, reducing the land’s overall agricultural productivity. This is a significant concern for local farmers who rely on that land for their livelihoods[[1](https://hir.harvard.edu/aerial-fumigation-in-colombia-the-bad-and-the-ugly/)].
**Interviewer**: What alternatives to aerial fumigation exist, and are there ongoing discussions in Colombia regarding these methods?
**Dr. Gonzalez**: Yes, there are alternative approaches, such as manual eradication and promoting sustainable crop alternatives. There is also a growing movement advocating for policy changes that prioritize health and environmental safety over aggressive eradication strategies. These discussions are critical, as they may lead to more sustainable methods of addressing the coca problem without infringing on community health and wellbeing[[1](https://hir.harvard.edu/aerial-fumigation-in-colombia-the-bad-and-the-ugly/)].
**Interviewer**: Thank you, Dr. Gonzalez. Your insights shed light on the complex interplay between drug policy, health, and environmental stewardship in Colombia. As this issue progresses, it will be essential to consider both the efficacy of eradication methods and their human and ecological costs.
**Dr. Gonzalez**: Thank you for having me. It’s crucial that we remain engaged in these discussions to find solutions that are just and sustainable.