This project investigates how growers and farmworkers are responding to new knowledge about the negative effects of certain pesticides used in California's strawberry industry. This concern arises in the wake of a contentious battle over methyl iodide, a highly toxic soil fumigant associated with birth defects that was designed to replace methyl bromide, an ozone depleting chemical that will be phased out by 2015 under the Montreal Protocol. Vociferous opposition led to the withdrawal of methyl iodide from the US market in 2012. Since then, the California strawberry industry has been seeking a viable replacement for methyl bromide, at the same time that it seeks to maintain access to a range of other soil fumigants to sustain high production. While the industry argues that these chemicals are necessary to provide healthy fresh fruit for mass markets, their potential to cause birth defects have produced new concerns for farmworkers and nearby communities. However, farmworkers are politically vulnerable and this thwarts their ability to contest agro-chemical use or to advocate for more protective application protocols or less toxic alternatives. Compounding their vulnerability is the issue of proof, given the mobility of chemicals and workers, combined with generational time lags in the manifestation of potential negative effects from exposure. At stake, then, are fundamental questions of what populations are deserving of health and well being, how uncertainty of exposure plays out in these calculations, and therefore how protection, whether in the form of technology-forcing regulatory restrictions or more restrictive application protocols, will be implemented. To analyze these issues, the project will seek to determine 1) the use of methyl bromide relative to other chemical and non-chemical alternatives during the most recent phase-out period; 2) how enhanced visibility of farmworker health issues, combined with, and complicated by, continued regulatory uncertainty and the contingencies associated with exposure, have influenced grower decisions on the use of chemical and non-chemical substitutes to methyl bromide; and 3) how farmworkers' political and biological status have shaped their perspectives and self-advocacy on chemical and non chemical alternatives to methyl bromide and their respective application protocols. To answer these questions, researchers will gather and analyze data from pesticide use permits to determine how fumigant use has shifted over the past decade. In addition, they will conduct interviews with both growers and farmworkers in two different strawberry-producing regions: with growers to consider factors that shape growers' decisions to employ the various alternatives to methyl bromide and with farmworkers to learn whether the battle over methyl iodide has emboldened them to advocate for less toxic methods and/or enhanced their employment of self-protective practices.
The phase-out of methyl bromide represents a profound and unique opportunity to learn what growers do when faced with a regulatory change. This project will elucidate the relative roles of public outcry, economic need, ethical concern, and the availability of similarly toxic and less toxic substitutes in decision-making around toxic chemicals. It potentially demonstrates the power of regulatory battles to shape on-the-ground practices, even when actual regulation is less than practically optimal, especially for a group that lacks rights and capacities to shape regulation and contest violations. In addition, the project will have a substantial outreach and education component that will disseminate research to those who have a role in affecting regulation and a stake in minimizing exposure. Outreach will take place through published reports, industry conferences, and public meetings. Sharing the results of the research will potentially lead to safer practices, better training in the use of chemicals, and will possibly encourage the further development and dissemination of less toxic alternatives. The research includes engagement with people from underrepresented groups in both the research and outreach and will thereby fulfill goals of inclusion.
