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.
1732513230
#ecological #impact #drugs
What are the environmental and health risks associated with the aerial spraying of glyphosate on coca crops in Colombia?
**Interview with Dr. Ana Morales, Colombian Environmental Policy Expert**
**Host:** Welcome, Dr. Morales. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the recent news regarding the Colombian government’s plans to reinstate aerial spraying of glyphosate on coca crops.
**Dr. Morales:** Thank you for having me. The situation is quite complex and deeply concerning from both environmental and social perspectives.
**Host:** To start off, can you explain the rationale behind the government’s decision to resume aerial fumigation?
**Dr. Morales:** The Colombian government, under President Iván Duque, contends that reinstating aerial spraying is a necessary measure to combat drug trafficking, particularly the production of cocaine from coca plants. They argue that glyphosate is an effective herbicide for eradicating these crops, and it has been supported by the U.S. government as part of international drug control efforts [[1](https://www.wola.org/analysis/restarting-aerial-fumigation-of-drug-crops-in-colombia-is-a-mistake/)].
**Host:** However, there has been significant opposition to this move. What are the main concerns?
**Dr. Morales:** The primary concerns include environmental and health impacts. Glyphosate is linked to various health risks, including cancer, and its use has been highly controversial. Additionally, aerial spraying can lead to significant ecological damage, such as deforestation, soil degradation, and harm to non-target crops and wildlife. Many communities also express fears of water contamination [[1](https://www.wola.org/analysis/restarting-aerial-fumigation-of-drug-crops-in-colombia-is-a-mistake/)].
**Host:** Has there been a legal framework surrounding these interventions?
**Dr. Morales:** Yes, there has been. The Colombian Constitutional Court previously imposed restrictions on the use of glyphosate due to health and environmental concerns. The government’s current push to “modulate” these rulings has raised alarms among various human rights and environmental organizations. They are concerned that this undermines the legal safeguards that were established to protect local communities and ecosystems [[1](https://www.wola.org/analysis/restarting-aerial-fumigation-of-drug-crops-in-colombia-is-a-mistake/)].
**Host:** What alternatives exist to aerial spraying that could be pursued by the Colombian government?
**Dr. Morales:** There are several alternatives worth exploring, such as investing in agricultural development programs that provide coca farmers with viable economic options, including crop substitution or diversification. Additionally, implementing community-led initiatives that focus on sustainable practices could yield better outcomes without the harmful side effects associated with chemical spraying [[1](https://www.wola.org/analysis/restarting-aerial-fumigation-of-drug-crops-in-colombia-is-a-mistake/)].
**Host:** it seems that while the fight against drugs is crucial, the methods employed must consider long-term impacts on health, the environment, and communities.
**Dr. Morales:** Exactly. We need a multifaceted approach to tackle the issue of coca cultivation that prioritizes public health and environmental sustainability alongside effective drug control measures. It’s a challenging balance, but it’s essential for the well-being of all stakeholders involved.
**Host:** Thank you, Dr. Morales, for your insights on this critical issue. We appreciate your expertise.
**Dr. Morales:** Thank you for having me.
