SOCIO-ENVIRONMENTAL CONFLICT AND PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH

RIGHTS: A CASE STUDY IN A FLOWER PLANTATION IN

ECUADORRaúl Harari MD PhD Homero Harari Eng., Mario Sunta MD

IFA – Institute for Development of Production and Work Environment. Quito, Ecuador.

Ramazzini Days, 2007

Flowerculture in Ecuador

• 20 years of flower production• 60,000 workers directly*• 60,000 workers indirectly*• 3600 Hectareas* approximately cultivated

(*Expoflores, 2006)

100,0095.945,46 TOTAL

10,35 9.926,15 OTROS

6,77 6.500,09 RUSIA

1,36 1.303,34 ITALIA

8,55 8.202,32 HOLANDA

1,67 1.600,41 ALEMANIA

71,30 68.413,15 ESTADOS UNIDOS

% MetricTons 2004

JANUARY-DECEMBER 2004 Source: Central Bank - Ecuador

EXPOFLORES

• 30 different pesticides are used and sprayed 3-4 times per week

• Among the pesticides there are: organophosphates, carbamates, pyrethroids

• Different doses• Long term exposure

Flowerculture in Ecuador

The Case Study

Mulalillo

100 km from Quito

Mulalillo

• The High School “Jose Peralta”• 400 students• Class schedule 7am – 2 pm

Mulalillo

• Flower Plantation “Nevado Ecuador”• Settled beside (40 m.) the School “Jose

Peralta” in 1998.• Productive surface of 35 Hectareas• Production of 20 millions of stems/year• 400 workers• Working time 7am-3pm

• Exports to : Russia 50%), Spain (30%) and others (Sweden)

• Is the plantation with most environmental certifications in the world:Max Havelaar, Eurogap, MPS, Flower Label Program - FLP, Veriflora, Flor del Ecuador, BASC, ISO 9000

EL PRODUCTOR TOP DE ROSAS

( ROSES’ TOP PRODUCER)

Pesticide Type Tox ClassAliette Fosetyl Aluminium III

Amistar Azoxystrobin IIIBavistin Carbamato IVDanitol Piretroide IFitoraz Cymoxanil + EBDC II

Fongarid Furaxalil (descontinuado) IIIMeltatox Dodemorph Acephate IIMesurol Carbamato II

Metasistox Organofosforado IIPrevicur Carbamato IVProsper Pirimidinyl IIIRegent Fipronil IIRidomil EBDC IIIRovral Iprodione IVStroby Strobilurina ISwitch Fludioxonil IIITedion Tetradifon III

Terraclor Descontinuado en 1999Nimrod Bupirimate IIIBenomil Carbamato IVCaptan Ciclohexano IKarate Piretroide sintético IActara Thiametoxan III

Source: FARM CHEMICALS HANDBOOK 2001.

The Conflict

There was a denunciation againstthe Plantation Nevado Ecuador from

the School in the PublicDefender Office because the

plantationdidn’t take any control to avoid or

diminish the pesticides applications during school activities, after

several requests,and due to some health effects in the students

probably caused by pesticides dust coming from the plantation

Denunciation in the

Defensoría del Pueblo(Local Court)

The Study:

• Cross Sectional Study• Environmental samples from soil and dust from the windows of the

school and the tables o the pupils inside the classroom• Questionnaire about environmental and occupational (children at

work), and at home exposure to pesticides and health effects• Clinical examinations • Neurobehavioral tests ( abbreviated NCTB WHO Battery)• Erythrocyte Acetyl cholinesterase test • Urine samples • Population were children from the Jose Peralta School and a

Reference Group from other school far from the flower plantations.

The Results

• Results showed the presence of pesticides in environmental and in the school samples

• Significant statistical differences in the neurobehavioral tests were found between the exposed students in comparison with the non exposed students of the reference school.

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

53Yes

54Total1No

Total

Do you smell pesticideodors while you are atschool?

(IC 1,69 - 3,32)RR= 2,37

(IC 1,19 - 1,63)RR= 1,39

71Total21No50Yes

Total

Do you smell pesticideodors while you are atschool?

71Total46No25Yes

TotalDid you feel at the sametime health effects?

54Total 9No

45YesTotal

Did you feel at the sametime health effects?

(IC 1,06 - 1,36)RR= 1,20

71Total14No57Yes

TotalHeadache

54Total2No52Yes

TotalHeadache

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

54Total general

21No

33Yes

TotalBlurred vision

71Total general44No27Yes

TotalBlurred vision

54Total31No23Yes

TotalRhinorrea

71Total58No13Yes

TotalRhinorrea

(IC 1,12 - 2,32)RR= 1,61

(IC 1,30 - 4,16)

RR= 2,33

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

54Total17No37Yes

TotalCough and Pharingeal

secretion

71Total 40No31Yes

TotalCough and Pharingeal

secretion

(IC 1,14 - 2,16)

RR= 1,57

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

1,32 - 1,421,34 - 1,48

1,3766111111,416574074

LeftRight

Vibration Thresholds

1,28 - 1,361,39 - 1,43

1,3208169011,419647887

LeftRight

Vibration Thresholds

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

67,48 - 79,1489,65 - 99,5777,31 - 87,4182,57 - 92,3931,73 - 36,8329,05 - 35,2320,75 - 25,7125,24 - 31,6424,66 - 31,166,05 - 7,05

73,3157894794,6153846282,3666666787,4838709734,2888888932,1428571423,2391304328,4489795927,914893626,555555556

987654321Block Number

Time ( seconds)Block Design

48,84 - 59,2084,12 - 92,3282,82 - 91,3280,39 - 89,8332,03 - 37,4731,85 - 36,6320,04 - 25,0226,38 - 31,2827,87 - 32,856,17 - 6,93

54,0238709788,2294871887,0774468185,1158620734,7536065634,2463934422,5363235328,8337878830,367096777,422535211

987654321Block

Number

Time (seconds)Block

Design

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

2,95 - 3,152,96 -3,223,60 - 3,943,65 - 3,97103,07 - 116,1148,06 - 54,16

3,0555555563,0925925933,7777777783,814814815109,592592651,11111111

Desc. 2Desc. 1Asc. 2Asc. 1

Digit Span

Trials B(Time/ Seconds)

Trials A (Time/

seconds)

2,74 - 2,922,80 - 2,963,79 - 4,013,91 - 4,13116,17 - 136,1546,41 - 53,75

2,8309859152,8873239443,9014084514,028169014126,169014150,08450704

Desc. 2Desc. 1Asc. 2Asc. 1

Digit SpanTrials B(Time/

Seconds)

Trials A (Time/

seconds)

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

0,35 - 0,610,36 - 0,6616,36 - 17,3416,86 - 17,9815,75 - 16,790,34 - 0,660,32 - 0,7017,94 - 19,2018,82 - 20,2016,92 - 18,32

0,4871794870,51282051316,8518518517,4259259316,277777780,50,51282051318,5740740719,5185185217,62962963

Mistakes NonDominant

Hand2

Mistakes NonDominant

Hand1Average

Non Dominant

Hand 2

Non Dominant

Hand 1

MistakesDominant

Hand2

MistakesDominant

Hand1AverageDominant

Hand 2Dominant

Hand 1

Santa Ana Test

0,26 - 0,500,18 - 0,3816,92 - 17,7617,44 - 18,3616,32 - 17,240,28 - 0,500,21 - 0,4318,21 - 19,1718,59 - 19,5917,73 - 18,83

0,380281690,28169014117,3450704217,9014084516,788732390,3943661970,32394366218,6901408519,0985915518,28169014

MistakesNon

DominantHand2

MistakesNon

DominantHand1Average

Non Dominant

Hand 2

Non Dominant

Hand 1

MistakesDominant

Hand2

MistakesDominant

Hand1AverageDominant

Hand 2Dominant

Hand 1

Santa Ana Test

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

64,24 - 80,9065,63 - 80,2538,58 - 51,70112,67 - 122,7730,89 - 42,99105,23 - 114,539,71 - 10,83

72,5740740772,9444444445,14814815117,722222236,94444444109,888888910,27777778

Average 2Average 1Mistakes 2Total 2Mistakes 1Total 1Benton Test

Pursuit aiming

82,21 - 91,2381,91 - 89,4127,10 - 35,56114,19 - 121,8321,06 27,24106,34 - 113,2811,48 - 12,36

86,6760563485,6619718331,33802817118,014084524,15492958109,816901411,92957746

Average 2Average 1Mistakes 2Total 2Mistakes 1Total 1Benton Test

Pursuit aiming

MULALILLO

(Exposed)

SALCEDO

(Non Exposed)

26,36 - 27,04

26,701852

Average u/gr

Erythrocyte AcetylCholinesterase

31,07 - 31,75

31,41267606

Average u/gr

Erythrocyte AcetylCholinesterase

in the conflictThe actors

SchoolJose Peralta:

Managers, teachersand students

IFAEXPOFLORES - The Ecuadorian Flower

Growers and ExportersAssociation

HealthProfessionals of

Salcedo

Municipality of Salcedo and the

Department ofEnvironment and

Hygiene

Population of Mulalillo

Mass media

Ministry of Public Health

The FlowerPlantation Nevado

Ecuador

The PeopleDefender

(Defensoria del Pueblo)

• The plantation we studied did not fulfill their own guidelines of environmental certifications that put a minimum limit of one hundred meters of distance from inhabited places, but anyway got the certification (Flower Label Program, 2007) and some national and local rules.

• The local authorities in most cases are not able to control the fulfillment of the environmental legislation or they do it too late, in a formal and initial way and as it was also demonstrated in this case.

Conclusions

Conclusions• The community does not have clear

mechanisms of demand of their needs and claims, moving between the aggressive demonstrations up to the indifference or powerlessness. It is very important to understand that if there are no answers to the people this situation could lead to dangerous conditions. Sometimes people think that this is the only way to be successful. At the same time it can be a boomerang since if the plantation closes it will be 400 persons who belong partly to the same community, unemployed.

Conclusions• The environmental certifications do not guarantee

enough the care of the environment and health, and could be used in our countries to avoid the law or to act with impunity.

• The local authorities are not powerful enough. This is the case of the Municipality of Salcedo and the Public Defender, if there is no popular pressure. They have many difficulties to do their job. One of this is the tendency to diminish the role of the Governmental controls in the society. In the local situation, the companies use the valid argument that they give employment, but try to use that to turn out to be out of any social, environmental or health control.

Conclusions

• The environmental certifications while they do not let the participation and the independent control of the State and of Unions, will be only agreements between third that cannot guarantee enough the care of the work environment, as well as the health of workers and communities. And if they were tripartite they would not be necessary: an important national and international legislation exists already on this matter.

Conclusions• The role of the state is not replaceable for

certifications or labels of third parts, in particular when they do not fulfill not even with their self established regulations.

• The independent research is a key question to help the people to identify the problems and to give a rationality to the conflicts. Researchers should provide scientific information and arguments to do prevention and to take care of environmental health. Then, we will get better results in the actions to be taken.

Conclusions

• The relation NGO's certifiers or the participation of the ONG'S in the certifications does not guarantee anything per se, since if the companies have problems with workers or the community, as in this case, they must defend them as part of the certification, and they cannot support the claims of the population, resigning their independence.

Conclusions

• It is important to say also, that the certifications have presented itself as an alternative, alternative to fulfill their own standards, alternative to go out of troubles and to probably achieve shorter ways or routes of escape to the legislation or environmental or labor problems.

Conclusions• Great reflexions about partnerships this cases have left, like

Partnership between communities and Universities and NGO´s are vital, in the recognition of environmental and health rights and to shorten times in which at least some measures should be taken. The lack of control of authorities in developing countries always had been a problem, but is not the dead end, could be the beginning of the construction of another alternative way, non a replace one, of common interests of the communities in the defense of the rights. In that sense, the independence of the research in universities andNGO´s is crucial. Perhaps they can not start this process, like in this example, but they could join the situation to help to find a solution.

• Until institutions become strong, this experiences help in developing countries to take care of specific questions and to built a new escenaire with laws and authorities prepared to deal with environmental health in time.

Some questions that should be answered

• What are useful the certifications for?

• Why in the panel of certifiers only are included international agencies, international unions, international consumers associations, but not national?

• If certifications are voluntary agreements, why there is no will to fulfill the environmental law?

• The Flower plantation had to fulfill the Ecuadorian Environmental Law.

• What would happen if this case occur in the cut-flowers importers countries?

And this kids?