Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

The Tobacco Industry and Pesticide Regulations: Case Studies from Tobacco Industry Archives

Patricia A. McDaniel, Gina Solomon and Ruth E. Malone
Environmental Health Perspectives
Vol. 113, No. 12 (Dec., 2005), pp. 1659-1665
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3436731
Page Count: 7
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Tobacco Industry and Pesticide Regulations: Case Studies from Tobacco Industry Archives
Preview not available

Abstract

Tobacco is a heavily pesticide-dependent crop. Because pesticides involve human safety and health issues, they are regulated nationally and internationally; however, little is known about how tobacco companies respond to regulatory pressures regarding pesticides. In this study we analyzed internal tobacco industry documents to describe industry activities aimed at influencing pesticide regulations. We used a case study approach based on examination of approximately 2,000 internal company documents and 3,885 pages of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests. The cases involved methoprene, the ethylene bisdithiocarbamates, and phosphine. We show how the tobacco industry successfully altered the outcome in two cases by hiring ex-agency scientists to write reports favorable to industry positions regarding pesticide regulations for national (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) and international (World Health Organization) regulatory bodies. We also show how the industry worked to forestall tobacco pesticide regulation by attempting to self-regulate in Europe, and how Philip Morris encouraged a pesticide manufacturer to apply for higher tolerance levels in Malaysia and Europe while keeping tobacco industry interest a secret from government regulators. This study suggests that the tobacco industry is able to exert considerable influence over the pesticide regulatory process and that increased scrutiny of this process and protection of the public interest in pesticide regulation may be warranted.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
1659
    1659
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1660
    1660
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1661
    1661
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1662
    1662
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1663
    1663
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1664
    1664
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1665
    1665