IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/roafes/v105y2024i4d10.1007_s41130-024-00221-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risks versus risks: The professional culture of discretion around pesticide risks

Author

Listed:
  • François Dedieu

    (Université Paris Est Marne La Vallée)

  • Guilhem Anzalone

    (Univ. Bretagne Loire)

Abstract

In France, there have been repeated warnings in recent years about the effects of pesticides on agricultural workers’ health, as well as cases of intoxication. Yet it is still hard to know if farmers are really dangerously exposed to pesticides. The literature on social manufacturing of ignorance focuses either on industries’ strategies to foster doubt or on the role of official tools to examine the risks, and tends to overlook the role of farmers in impeding the production of knowledge. Based on an empirical study of the supply chains of apples and potatoes, and through the lens of the sociology of decision-making, this article seeks to understand how the farmers’ close dependency on pesticides participates in downplaying the toxicity of pesticides. It shows that the practical use of pesticides involves a constant trade-off between legal, economic, and agricultural risks. This leads farmers to develop a culture of secrecy around real pesticide use, in which they hide irregularities. Such open secrecy, shared by a multitude of actors, causes agricultural workers to underestimate the danger of pesticides.

Suggested Citation

  • François Dedieu & Guilhem Anzalone, 2024. "Risks versus risks: The professional culture of discretion around pesticide risks," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 105(4), pages 443-464, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:roafes:v:105:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s41130-024-00221-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s41130-024-00221-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41130-024-00221-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41130-024-00221-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:roafes:v:105:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s41130-024-00221-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.