Glyphosate in Peru: Between Risk and the Government's Justification for not Banning it

Descripción del Articulo

Glyphosate, despite posing risks to human health and the environment, is one of the most widely used agrochemicals in Peru and globally. Motivated by this, the present research explores the reasons behind the regulatory gap in its prohibition, considering that the Peruvian legal framework assigns cl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Llanos Puga, Cesar Manuel, Eschenhagen Durán, María Luisa
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2025
Institución:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Repositorio:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:revistaspuc:article/28946
Enlace del recurso:http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/Kawsaypacha/article/view/28946
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:Risk management
Agrochemicals
Pesticides
Public policy
Peru
Gestión de riesgos
Agroquímicos
Plaguicidas
Políticas públicas
Perú
Descripción
Sumario:Glyphosate, despite posing risks to human health and the environment, is one of the most widely used agrochemicals in Peru and globally. Motivated by this, the present research explores the reasons behind the regulatory gap in its prohibition, considering that the Peruvian legal framework assigns clear responsibilities to certain authorities in the regulation of agricultural pesticides. The study departs from a technocratic view of risk and seeks to understand how government actors justify the continued existence of the risk. Thus, the central question is: How do governmental actors responsible for regulating the use of agricultural pesticides in Peru neutralize the risk associated with glyphosate use? To answer this, interviews were conducted with government representatives, accompanied by a document review of official reports. The findings revealed how government actors legitimize the use of glyphosate through techniques such as denial of responsibility, appeal to higher loyalties, defense of necessity, affirmation of a net positive impact, justification by comparison, and promotion of a systemic perspective. These rationalizations, linked to the actors' conception of risk, revealed various arguments to justify the non-prohibition of glyphosate. Additionally, the research contributes to the theoretical evolution of the concept of risk neutralization and to the understanding of issues related to the permissiveness of using hazardous chemical products, offering perspectives on the complex dynamics of pesticide regulation and risk management in Peru.
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).