4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Territórios Saudáveis e Sustentáveis (TSS) no Distrito Federal: agroecologia e impacto dos agrotóxicos Translated title: Healthy and Sustainable Territories (TSS) in the Federal District: agroecology and the impact of pesticides

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          RESUMO O modelo agrícola predominante no Brasil apresenta disparidades sociais, econômicas e ambientais acentuadas. Tal cenário consiste em um grande desafio para o avanço da agroecologia, um dos caminhos apontados pelas Nações Unidas para o alcance dos Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável (ODS) e o desenvolvimento territorial de forma sustentável. Assim, o presente estudo teve como objetivo analisar os limites e os desafios na implantação de estratégias territoriais sob a ótica dos Territórios Saudáveis e Sustentáveis (TSS), tendo como eixo estruturante a controvérsia agroecologia x agrotóxicos. O artigo enfoca sua análise na Região Integrada de Desenvolvimento do Distrito Federal e Entorno (Ride-DF), na forma de pesquisa do tipo prospectiva, com revisão de literatura e recolha documental pertinente. Conclui-se que, a despeito do seu potencial, são escassas as informações sobre a temática, especialmente na efetividade e eficácia da estratégia de implantação dos TSS e o uso da agroecologia como suporte. O estudo depreende ainda que há a necessidade de aprofundar a realização de novas pesquisas e a construção de estratégia de intervenção territorial sob a ótica dos TSS.

          Translated abstract

          ABSTRACT The predominant agricultural model in Brazil presents marked social, economic, and environmental disparities. This scenario consists of a great challenge for the advancement of Agroecology, one of the ways pointed out by the United Nations for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the territorial development in a sustainable way. Thus, the present study aimed to analyze the limits and challenges in the implementation of territorial strategies from the perspective of Healthy and Sustainable Territories (TSS), having the agroecology vs. agrochemicals controversy as a structuring axis. The essay focuses its analysis on the Integrated Development Region of the Federal District and Surroundings (RideDF), in the form of prospective research, with literature review and pertinent documentary collection. It is concluded that, in spite of its potential, information on the theme is scarce, especially on the effectiveness and efficiency of the TSS implementation strategy and the use of Agroecology as a support. The study also concludes that there is a need to deepen the accomplishment of new research and the construction of new territorial intervention strategies from the perspective of the TSS.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Trends in glyphosate herbicide use in the United States and globally

          Background Accurate pesticide use data are essential when studying the environmental and public health impacts of pesticide use. Since the mid-1990s, significant changes have occurred in when and how glyphosate herbicides are applied, and there has been a dramatic increase in the total volume applied. Methods Data on glyphosate applications were collected from multiple sources and integrated into a dataset spanning agricultural, non-agricultural, and total glyphosate use from 1974–2014 in the United States, and from 1994–2014 globally. Results Since 1974 in the U.S., over 1.6 billion kilograms of glyphosate active ingredient have been applied, or 19 % of estimated global use of glyphosate (8.6 billion kilograms). Globally, glyphosate use has risen almost 15-fold since so-called “Roundup Ready,” genetically engineered glyphosate-tolerant crops were introduced in 1996. Two-thirds of the total volume of glyphosate applied in the U.S. from 1974 to 2014 has been sprayed in just the last 10 years. The corresponding share globally is 72 %. In 2014, farmers sprayed enough glyphosate to apply ~1.0 kg/ha (0.8 pound/acre) on every hectare of U.S.-cultivated cropland and nearly 0.53 kg/ha (0.47 pounds/acre) on all cropland worldwide. Conclusions Genetically engineered herbicide-tolerant crops now account for about 56 % of global glyphosate use. In the U.S., no pesticide has come remotely close to such intensive and widespread use. This is likely the case globally, but published global pesticide use data are sparse. Glyphosate will likely remain the most widely applied pesticide worldwide for years to come, and interest will grow in quantifying ecological and human health impacts. Accurate, accessible time-series data on glyphosate use will accelerate research progress. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12302-016-0070-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The USA lags behind other agricultural nations in banning harmful pesticides

            Background The United States of America (USA), European Union (EU), Brazil and China are four of the largest agricultural producers and users of agricultural pesticides in the world. Comparing the inclination and ability of different regulatory agencies to ban or eliminate pesticides that have the most potential for harm to humans and the environment can provide a glimpse into the effectiveness of each nation’s pesticide regulatory laws and oversight. Methods The approval status of more than 500 agricultural pesticides was identified in the USA, EU, Brazil and China and compared between nations. The amount of pesticides that were used in the USA and banned in these other nations was compiled and linear regression was used to identify trends in use. Results There are 72, 17, and 11 pesticides approved for outdoor agricultural applications in the USA that are banned or in the process of complete phase out in the EU, Brazil, and China, respectively. Of the pesticides used in USA agriculture in 2016, 322 million pounds were of pesticides banned in the EU, 26 million pounds were of pesticides banned in Brazil and 40 million pounds were of pesticides banned in China. Pesticides banned in the EU account for more than a quarter of all agricultural pesticide use in the USA. The majority of pesticides banned in at least two of these three nations have not appreciably decreased in the USA over the last 25 years and almost all have stayed constant or increased over the last 10 years. Conclusions Many pesticides still widely used in the USA, at the level of tens to hundreds of millions of pounds annually, have been banned or are being phased out in the EU, China and Brazil. Of the pesticides banned in at least two of these nations, many have been implicated in acute pesticide poisonings in the USA and some are further restricted by individual states. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has all but abandoned its use of non-voluntary cancellations in recent years, making pesticide cancellation in the USA largely an exercise that requires consent by the regulated industry. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12940-019-0488-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The economic potential of agroecology: Empirical evidence from Europe

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                sdeb
                Saúde em Debate
                Saúde debate
                Centro Brasileiro de Estudos de Saúde (Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil )
                0103-1104
                2358-2898
                2022
                : 46
                : spe2
                : 249-261
                Affiliations
                [1] Brasília orgnameFundação Oswaldo Cruz Brazil andre.fenner@ 123456fiocruz.br
                [2] Rio de Janeiro orgnameFundação Oswaldo Cruz orgdiv1Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública Sergio Arouca (Ensp) Brazil
                Article
                S0103-11042022000400249 S0103-1104(22)04600200249
                10.1590/0103-11042022e217
                9998c540-9750-4a86-b7e2-b0fa0633f0b5

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 21 January 2022
                : 30 September 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 47, Pages: 13
                Product

                SciELO Public Health

                Categories
                Artigo Original

                Agrotóxicos,Agroecologia,Sociocultural territory,Agroecology,Agrichemicals,Território sociocultural

                Comments

                Comment on this article