Articulación territorial de la gestión de plaguicidas en el marco de la protección fitosanitaria. El caso del valle agrícola de Rioverde y Ciudad Fernández, San Luis Potosí

• Autores: María Guadalupe Galindo Mendoza, Norma Yadira Aldaz Galicia, Carlos Contreras Servín, Geovanni Saldierna Salas, Sandra Daniela Almendarez Rocha
• Localización: Investigaciones geográficas, ISSN 0188-4611, ISSN-e 2448-7279, Nº. 106, 2021
• Idioma: español
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Territorial Articulation of Pesticide Management in the Framework of Phytosanitary Protection. The Case of the Rioverde and Ciudad Fernandez Agricultural Valley, San Luis Potosi
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen
  • español

    La sanidad y la protección vegetal tienen como finalidad generar acciones para el control de plagas y enfermedades agrícolas, el uso de plaguicidas y la determinación de estatus fitosanitario para la comercialización en el marco de la seguridad alimentaria. Sin embargo, la protección vegetal como instrumento normativo y de regulación se ha quedado en la escala mundial y nacional, cuando el manejo de plagas es principalmente local (la finca o la parcela). Existe una desarticulación institucional y territorial en cuanto a la regulación de plaguicidas. A nivel mundial, se reconoció el Manejo Integrado de Plagas (MIP) cómo la política pública del manejo y control de plagas, a nivel local esa estructura no llegó y no se aplica por la inexistencia del modelo de extensionismo fitosanitario. Los actores que controlan la gestión de plaguicidas son las llamadas “casas agronómicas” que son pequeños negocios particulares que enfrentan políticas laxas tanto agrícolas, ambientales y de salud, actúan al margen de la normativa estatal y nacional. Establecen acuerdos y “reglas de juego” que estimulan y facilitan el uso indiscriminado de los agroquímicos. Tal es caso del valle agrícola de Rioverde y Ciudad Fernández, San Luis Potosí, particularmente en el ejido El Refugio se aplican plaguicidas restringidos como: Diazinon, Glifosato, Carbofuran, Clorpirifos Etil, Metamidofos, Metomilo y Monocrotofos, todos Plaguicidas Altamente Peligrosos (PAP). Por lo antes mencionado, este trabajo tuvo como objetivo, demostrar que los problemas de gobernanza territorial constituyen el reto más importante para afrontar y resolver el problema de plaguicidas en México.

  • English

    Plant health and protection are intended to foster actions for the control of agricultural pests and diseases, the use of pesticides, and the definition of phytosanitary status for marketing within a food security framework. However, as a regulatory instrument, plant protection has remained at global and country levels, whereas pest management is mainly local. There is institutional and territorial disarticulation in the regulation of pesticides. At the global level, Integrated Pest Management (IPM) was recognized as the public policy for pest management and control; however, this structure did not reach the local level and is not applied because of the lack of a phytosanitary model. Consequently, the only current means of eradicating agricultural pests relies in the indiscriminate use of pesticides, some of which are banned in other countries due to significant adverse human and environmental health impacts. However, their distribution and commercialization is allowed in Mexico. The present research was carried out in the agricultural valley of Rioverde and Ciudad Fernandez, two municipalities of the state of San Luis Potosi considered a key agricultural area for its high orange production. This area is characterized by the extensive use of hazardous pesticides, which has led to public health effects and concerns about its most important resource, water. For the above, this work aimed to demonstrate that territorial governance issues are the primary challenge for tackling and resolving the pesticide problem in Mexico. The methodology involved qualitative and quantitative approaches based on innovative knowledge promotion through geotechnologies seeking to identify the areas and plots with the greatest use of pesticides to fight pests and crop diseases. The methodological process involved two phases. a) Sampling took place through the mobile application called “Agrochemicals LAGES” developed by the Laboratorio Nacional de Geoprocesamiento de Información Fitosanitaria (National Plant Health Information Geoprocessing Laboratory; LaNGIF in Spanish), by students of Engineering in Sustainable Agricultural Innovation of the Higher Technological Institute (ITS, in Spanish) and Agro-Industrial Engineering and Agronomic Engineering in Plant Engineering at Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosi (UASLP); This stage yielded a database of 22,939 data on producers, crops, and pesticides. b) The data analysis consisted, first of all, of differentiating between permitted and restricted pesticides used in the study area, based on the Register of Cancelled Pesticides and Nutrients of the Federal Commission for the Protection against Health Risks (COFEPRIS, in Spanish). Then, we used the Chi-square (X2) non-parametric statistical hypothesis test to explore the potential association between education level, crop type (vegetables, maize, and orange), and taxonomic group with pesticides; a multi-criteria analysis was also carried out to identify and classify, through spatial nodes, areas where restricted pesticides are applied and to characterize producers, crops, and land tenure. As a result, we detected that “agronomic houses” control the management of pesticides. These are small private businesses that face loose agricultural, environmental, and health policies, and operate outside state and country regulations. In statistical terms, the crops involving the most frequent use of restricted pesticides were maize and vegetables. In spatial terms, the restricted pesticides used in El Refugio include  Diazinon, glyphosate, Carbofuran, Ethyl Chlorpyrifos, Metamidophos, Metomyl, and monocrotophos, all classified as highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs). In view of this scenario, it is necessary to produce inventories according to the phytosanitary status of pests and diseases, as well as diagnostics on pesticide use at local scale. The lack of these tools makes it difficult to implement any actions aimed at solving and reducing the economic, environmental, and health issues caused by these disarticulated practices. The methodological triad that involved the use of geotechnologies, statistical analysis, and spatial analysis allowed us to reach a diagnosis and monitor the local use and management of pesticides at low cost. To note, the identification of those areas with the greatest application of restricted pesticides does not aim to transfer any responsibility to the producer. On the contrary, they intend to target phytosanitary actions to specific sites.