End of endosulfan
by
AJ Philip |
The pesticide was banned by the Kerala government a few years ago
Endosulfan, an all-purpose pesticide, has become a bone of contention between the state of Kerala and the federal Indian government. On April 29, when Kerala Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan received news from the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants that it has just “banned” endosulfan, he went ecstatic over it. Celebrations soon broke out all over Kerala, which had gone in for a complete shutdown the same day to press the state’s demand for an all-India ban on the pesticide.
Earlier in the week, the chief minister sat on a seven-hour satyagraha to force the federal government to ban it. The Stockholm decision will not come into force immediately as the government of India has to issue a special notification for the purpose. What is significant is that exemptions have been made in the case of 22 crops, including rice, wheat and coffee, for which endosulfan can be used until alternatives are suggested by a special committee of the Stockholm Convention.
India also argued successfully that developing countries should be compensated as they phase out endosulfan. All this can take even five years. What the debate and the final decision underscore is how invaluable endosulfan has been as a component of India’s green revolution. If it became the villain of the piece in Kerala, the responsibility should squarely be laid at the doorstep of the Plantation Corporation of Kerala.
The corporation, which has a cashew farm, spread over hundreds of acres of land in Kasargode district, had been spraying endosulfan aerially over the cashew plants. This continued for nearly 20 years. Thus the open wells and other water sources in the area got contaminated. It is said that, as a result, people – mostly encroachers of corporation land – suffer from several health problems. A disproportionately large number of children were also born with deformities. Incidentally, there are no ‘documented’ cases of endosulfan victims anywhere else in the country.
The pesticide was banned by the Kerala government a few years ago, though farmers still buy endosulfan from the black market. It is smuggled from neighbouring Tamil Nadu, where it is not banned. The reason why it is popular with the Indian farmer is that it is cheap and effective against a large number of pests.
Endosulfan was first manufactured by a German firm and farmers in Europe made good use of it for more than 50 years. Today, it is manufactured by several companies, both public and private, in India. In fact, India is the world’s largest manufacturer and exporter of endosulfan, while the single largest consumer is China. European countries no longer use endosulfan and they are in the forefront of the campaign against it, for they have nothing to lose.
In the case of countries like India, an immediate all-India ban would adversely affect the farmer, who will have to pay 10 times the price of endosulfan for its substitute. Prices of agricultural produce would also go up hitting the common man. A ban is, therefore, not as simple as it appears to be. Unfortunately, in the debate on endosulfan, these issues were seldom discussed, as the participants were, more often than not, influenced by the pictures of the crippled children of Kasargode.
What is even more disconcerting is that a section of the people seems to believe that most modern-day health problems are a result of excessive use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides. There is a lobby which has been promoting what is known as ‘organic farming’.
However harmful chemical fertilisers and pesticides are, they are indispensable for large-scale cultivation. Most people do not realise that in 1901 when chemical fertilisers and pesticides were not in use and rivers and streams were free from pollution, the life expectancy of an average Indian at birth was just 23 years. Today it is 64.4 years against China’s 73.5 years.
What’s more, famines were quite common those days. The population has increased manifold to reach 1.21 billion but there have, of late, been no starvation deaths and distress sale of babies. Much of this has been made possible by the investments in fertiliser and pesticide plants.
If the disadvantages of endosulfan far outweigh its advantages, it needs to be banned forthwith. But care should be taken to ensure that its substitute is safe in all respects, except to the pests and the insects it seeks to eliminate. And if it can be made available to the farmer at a price he can afford, nobody will ever shed tears over endosulfan.
Oman Tribune
|
Other comment for AJ Philip
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| NEWS UPDATES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
