• About Us
    • About the platform
    • Editorial Collective
  • Essays
    • Short Essays
    • Longer Reads
    • Reviews
    • Interviews
  • Series
    • Italian Political Ecologies
    • Reimagining, remembering and reclaiming water
    • Political Ecologies of the Far Right
    • Green inequalities in the city
    • Authoritarianism, populism and political ecology
    • Ecology after Capitalism
    • Ecomodernist socialism and comunist futurism
    • Political Ecology for Civil Society
    • World Press Photography Awards
    • Authoritarianism, populism and political ecology
    • Green inequalities in the city
    • Political Ecologies of Pesticides
    • Political Ecologies of the Far Right
    • Political Ecology for Civil Society
    • Ecomodernist socialism and comunist futurism
    • World Press Photography Awards
    • Ecology after Capitalism
    • Reimagining, remembering and reclaiming water
  • Resources
  • Events and Calls
  • Art & multimedia
  • Contribute
  • About Us
    • About the platform
    • Editorial Collective
  • Essays
    • Short Essays
    • Longer Reads
    • Reviews
    • Interviews
  • Series
    • Italian Political Ecologies
    • Reimagining, remembering and reclaiming water
    • Political Ecologies of the Far Right
    • Green inequalities in the city
    • Authoritarianism, populism and political ecology
    • Ecology after Capitalism
    • Ecomodernist socialism and comunist futurism
    • Political Ecology for Civil Society
    • World Press Photography Awards
    • Authoritarianism, populism and political ecology
    • Green inequalities in the city
    • Political Ecologies of Pesticides
    • Political Ecologies of the Far Right
    • Political Ecology for Civil Society
    • Ecomodernist socialism and comunist futurism
    • World Press Photography Awards
    • Ecology after Capitalism
    • Reimagining, remembering and reclaiming water
  • Resources
  • Events and Calls
  • Art & multimedia
  • Contribute
  • About Us
    • About the platform
    • Editorial Collective
  • Essays
    • Short Essays
    • Longer Reads
    • Reviews
    • Interviews
  • Series
    • Italian Political Ecologies
    • Reimagining, remembering and reclaiming water
    • Political Ecologies of the Far Right
    • Green inequalities in the city
    • Authoritarianism, populism and political ecology
    • Ecology after Capitalism
    • Ecomodernist socialism and comunist futurism
    • Political Ecology for Civil Society
    • World Press Photography Awards
    • Authoritarianism, populism and political ecology
    • Green inequalities in the city
    • Political Ecologies of Pesticides
    • Political Ecologies of the Far Right
    • Political Ecology for Civil Society
    • Ecomodernist socialism and comunist futurism
    • World Press Photography Awards
    • Ecology after Capitalism
    • Reimagining, remembering and reclaiming water
  • Resources
  • Events and Calls
  • Art & multimedia
  • Contribute
Ocean Mourning – R.I.P. Mar
November 1, 2022
Venice Climate March, September 10, 2022. Credits: Michele Lapini.
L’estate più calda della storia. Riflessioni e prospettive del movimento per la giustizia climatica in Italia (parte I)
November 15, 2022

From Autarky to Agnotology: Arsenic Pesticides and the Making of Ignorance in early Francoist Spain (1939-1953)

Published by Undisciplined Environments on November 10, 2022

By José Ramón Bertomeu Sánchez. 

Massive pesticide usage was created through the disciplining of farmers in the use of new chemical technologies during Franco’s dictatorship, contributing to concealing the slow and invisible poisoning of agricultural workers and consumers, leaving a toxic legacy in Spanish agriculture up to today.

Disciplining farmers in the use of new chemical technologies was part of the patriotic fight against insects aimed at protecting the food supply and encouraging the development of national industry on the road to self-sufficiency prompted by the new authoritarian state. The co-production of Franco’s regime and the new forms of chemical pest control created long-standing social and discursive practices, which contributed to concealing the slow and invisible poisoning of agricultural workers and consumers. These architectures of ignorance endured years beyond the Francoist regime and encouraged the massive usage of pesticides in Spanish agriculture which remains nowadays as a toxic legacy.

Today, at the beginning of the 21st century, Spanish agriculture is one of the main consumers of pesticides in the European Union. This is different than the first half of the 20th century, when agronomists lamented the low use of fertilizers and pesticides as one of the causes of the “backwardness” of Spanish agriculture. To understand the dramatic change in pesticide use during the last century, I suggest paying more attention to the early years of the Francoist dictatorship in the 1940s, when arsenic pesticides were massively introduced in Spain.

This group of dangerous pesticides had been globally introduced at the end of the 19th century by adapting previous arsenical compounds, such as the so-called “Paris green”, or new ones such as lead arsenate. They became the most popular pesticides before the advent of DDT and other synthetic ones after the Second World War. Then, large amounts of arsenic compounds became available at low prices as by-products of the emerging heavy chemical industry (Romero, 2021). Chemists, engineers and businessmen were pleased to see this highly toxic waste of their industries being transformed into a marketable product which could be sold to farmers for pest control. This broad availability of toxic products (such as arsenates) contributed to the marginalization of other technologies for pest control in the 20th century (e.g. mechanical methods).

Fig 1. Several leaflets published by Spanish agricultural engineers on the Colorado beetles during the 1940s. Source: Vicent Peset Llorca Library, Institut López Piñero, Universitat de València. Pictures by the author.

In Spain, which was lacking by then a chemical industry producing large quantities of toxic waste, the arrival of arsenic pesticides took place thanks to a number of ecological, political and economic factors converging around the early 1940s. Most importantly, a new pest affecting potato production, the Colorado beetle, moved eastward from the center of the USA to the Atlantic coast and reaching Europe at the first decades of the 20th century.

In Spain, as elsewhere, several regulations were implemented to avoid the circulation of infected potatoes, such as burning fields, using high quantities of toxic pesticides, controlling imports, and establishing quarantine zones. Agricultural engineers organized international conferences to discuss other measures to be adopted for the control of the pest, but were all in vain.

At the Iberian Peninsula, the Colorado beetle was firstly detected in northern Catalonia, near the Pyrenees, during the summer of 1935. Drastic steps were taken: the area was isolated, the potato harvest was destroyed, and all the surrounding fields (more than forty kilometers around) were treated with arsenic pesticides. This first episode was successfully contained, but the frustrated military coup against the democratic government in July 1936, which unleashed the Spanish Civil War, dramatically reduced the resources for controlling the pest. The situation was alarming as potatoes were one of most important crops in Spanish agriculture and these post-war years were marked by famine, state violence and political terror.

This challenging situation (a political and agronomic crisis) encouraged the intensive use of pesticides which so unsuccessfully had been prompted by Spanish agricultural engineers during the first decades of the 20th century. Just at the end of the Civil War, at the beginning of the Francoist dictatorship, new services for pest control were created, including a special office for dealing with the Colorado beetle. Agricultural engineers coordinated an extended network of provincial agriculture offices and experimental stations, which had been set up during previous decades.

In each Spanish province, at the top of the agriculture office, an agricultural engineer oversaw the campaigns against the Colorado beetle, which included a broad range of multimedia activities addressed to the farmers: talks, practical courses, leaflets, articles in newspapers, radio broadcasting, and even documentary films.  Agricultural engineers also handled the acquisition of arsenic pesticides and spraying equipment, which were distributed for free (or at low price) to the farmers to encourage further investment in these products.

Fig 2. Several images of agricultural engineers at the National Meeting organized in Madrid in 1950 under the presidency of General Franco (left below). Pictures from the book: Congreso Nacional de Ingeniería Agronómica. Madrid: Asociación Nacional de Ingenieros Agronómos, 1950. Personal collection.

Apart from the new pest, the arrival of arsenic insecticides was favored by the autarkic policies of the early Franco governments, which sought to promote industrialization by mobilizing natural resources – in this case, the arsenic mines located in the northwest of Spain. Moreover, in order to protect the national industry, new regulations concerning the trade of pesticides were introduced during the early 1940s. A “National Register for Phytosanitary Products” (“Registro Nacional de Productos Fitosanitarios”) was created, almost at the same time as a similar register was implemented in Vichy’s France.

A special procedure was created for the registration of imported pesticides to be sold in Spain. The restrictions to foreign companies favored the emergence of local pharmaceutical and agrochemical companies with a reduced number of employees, including some chemists, agricultural engineers or entomologists. Some of these companies grew during the following decades and turned into important pesticide industries during the 1960s. They co-existed with many small producers and retailers whose activity was however less persistent.

Apart from promoting national industry, the register was intended to guarantee the quality of pesticides, that is, to confirm their deleterious virtues on bugs and their harmless effects for plants. As many engineers recognized, fraud and lack of efficacy undermined the credibility of the chemical methods for pest control, making even more difficult to convince farmers to follow the official guidelines against the Colorado beetles. Following the new regulations, samples of the new pesticides were sent to the provincial agriculture offices, whose directors wrote a preliminary report focusing on the producers and their capacity for making large amounts of pesticides, using if possible national natural resources. The reports usually also included information regarding political views and connections to the Francoist regime. In fact, many small producers, whose pesticides were officially registered, were political figures in their local contexts. Around a thousand of different products were analyzed between 1943 and 1950 and the number of the rejected proposals was around a quarter of those submitted.

With the help of chemists, agricultural engineers developed new tests adapted to the new synthetic products which replaced the arsenic pesticides during the 1950s. However, no information was required for the register of new pesticides regarding risks for cattle, farmers or food consumers. In other words, workers’ safety, public health, and environmental issues were absent from the National Register of Pesticides.

Fig 3. A group of young members of the Spanish fascist-like party (Falange), marching on and singing Fascist anthems, in front of the main political Francoist authorities in Madrid, with pesticide sprayers in their backs, intended to be employed in the campaigns against the potato beetle. Front page of the journal Hoja Oficial del Lunes, Madrid, 18 June 1945. Source https://prensahistorica.mcu.es/.

Summing up, arsenic pesticides should be considered socio-technological products that inform many features of the early years of the Francoist dictatorship. These products contributed to the consolidation of Francoism, while at the same time serving to introduce Spanish agriculture into the “vicious circle” of pesticides, through regulations which largely neglected the toxic risks. Thanks to these regulations, agronomic practices, and autarkic policies, the slow violence caused by arsenates was largely silenced, despite their very well-known risks to workers, consumers, and the environment.

This hints at several forms of production of ignorance concerning toxic risks. The Francoist regulations disregarded the available information concerning the toxic effects of pesticides, while promoting the introduction of new products, such as organochlorides as DDT, whose effects were unknown or had been scarcely studied, particularly when low doses and long expositions were at work. Neither human nor material resources were mobilized to deal with this massive poisoning, which explains the scarce data available for epidemiological studies or experimental research.

This lack of interest to pesticides impacts on health contrasts with the numerous studies conducted on the effects of arsenic pesticides on crops and insects which was supported by the new authoritarian regime to introduce, quickly and widely, arsenic pesticides in Spanish agriculture. While enjoying advantages for chemical pest control programs, agronomists helped consolidate the new Franco regime by providing technological solutions to the food crisis and connecting agriculture and industry through national raw materials in times of autarkic policies.

With the help of the new arsenic pesticides, both agricultural engineers and the new political authorities were able to present themselves as the main fighters against the invasion of the Colorado beetles, often using terms similar to those used against the antifascists groups or the previous democratic governments: Like the Civil War, the war against insects was presented as “a campaign of survival for the Spanish nation”, where the only possible option was “the extermination of the enemy” through extreme violence. Pest control activities were described using military terms such as invasions, contention, troops, weapons, annihilation, and so on.

Disciplining farmers in the use of new chemical technologies was part of the patriotic fight against insects aimed at protecting the food supply and encouraging the development of national industry on the road to self-sufficiency prompted by the new authoritarian state. The co-production of Franco’s regime and the new forms of chemical pest control created long-standing social and discursive practices, which contributed to concealing the slow and invisible poisoning of agricultural workers and consumers. These architectures of ignorance endured years beyond the Francoist regime and encouraged the massive usage of pesticides in Spanish agriculture which remains nowadays as a toxic legacy.

—

José Ramón Bertomeu Sánchez is professor of history of science at the University of Valencia. His current work is on the pesticide industry and the making of ignorance on toxic risks in 20th-century Spain. His last book is “Tóxicos: Pasado y Presente” (Barcelona, Icaria, 2021). More details in https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2040-4507.

Bertomeu Sánchez, José Ramón. «Arsenical Pesticides in Early Francoist Spain: Fascism, Autarky, Agricultural Engineers and the Invisibility of Toxic Risks». HoST – Journal of History of Science and Technology 13, n.o 1 (2019): 53-82. https://doi.org/10.2478/host-2019-0005.

Romero, Adam M. Economic Poisoning: Industrial Waste and the Chemicalization of American Agriculture. Oakland, California: University of California Press, 2021.

Share
Undisciplined Environments
Undisciplined Environments

Related posts

March 7, 2023

South-South Circles of Poison? Malaysia’s role in (re)creating uneven geographies


Read more
December 13, 2022

Formulating poisons: racism, agrochemicals, and cotton


Read more
September 13, 2022

The gendered consequences of ‘undone science’ in a pesticide-contaminated area in Nicaragua


Read more

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search this site

✕

Subscribe to our Newsfeed

We keep your data private and share your data only with third parties that make this service possible. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Tags

Agriculture Alternatives Anthropocene Art Brazil Capitalism Cities Climate change Climate crisis Climate justice Colonialism, Post-colonialism & Decolonization Commoning Commons Conflicts Conservation & Biodiversity COVID-19 Culture Decolonial Political Ecologies Degrowth Democracy Development Disaster Energy Environmental Change Environmental History Environmental Justice Environmental movements Extractivism Food Forests Green inequalities Indigenous Peoples Land Methodologies Mining & Extractivism Movements & Resistance Neoliberalism Post-colonialism Post-colonialism & Decolonization Social Movements & Resistance Urban Violence Waste Water water governance

Visit WEGO

wegoint.org
This website is co-funded by WEGO

Popular Posts

  • Indigenous Science 292 views
  • South-South Circles of Poison? Malaysia’s role in (re)creating uneven geographies 141 views
  • What does virtual water conceal? 121 views
  • A comprehensive political ecology reading list 98 views
  • Weaving musical spaces of indigenous resistance for environmental justice 85 views
  • Venice Climate March, September 10, 2022. Credits: Michele Lapini From overlapping to convergence: workers’ struggles and climate justice from GKN, Florence 80 views

Recent Comments

  • February 9, 2023

    About refrigerators – Thoughts in words commented on About refrigerators

  • February 5, 2023

    Luciano medinero morales commented on Fruta saludable, cuerpos enfermos

  • January 29, 2023

    User19 commented on Green is the new brown: ecology in the metapolitics of the far right

  • January 26, 2023

    Book review: “Enlightenment and Ecology: The Legacy of Murray Bookchin in the 21st Century” – towardsautonomyblog commented on Social Ecology, Kurdistan, and the Origins of Freedom

  • January 25, 2023

    المدن المستدامة بعد COVID-19: هل المناطق الخضراء على غرار برشلونة هي الحل؟ - Corepaedia news commented on To Green Or Not To Green: Four stories of urban (in)justice in Barcelona

  • January 4, 2023

    Timo commented on Against the misrepresentation of climate activism in Lützerath aka the ZAD Rhineland

✕

Tags

Agriculture Alternatives Anthropocene Art Brazil Capitalism Cities Climate change Climate crisis Climate justice Colonialism, Post-colonialism & Decolonization Commoning Commons Conflicts Conservation & Biodiversity COVID-19 Culture Decolonial Political Ecologies Degrowth Democracy Development Disaster Energy Environmental Change Environmental History Environmental Justice Environmental movements Extractivism Food Forests Green inequalities Indigenous Peoples Land Methodologies Mining & Extractivism Movements & Resistance Neoliberalism Post-colonialism Post-colonialism & Decolonization Social Movements & Resistance Urban Violence Waste Water water governance

Follow us

facebook       twitter
E-Mail Us : undisciplinedenvironments@gmail.com

Contribute

If you want to contribute send us your text at undisciplinedenvironments@gmail.com
Find our posting guide here

About Us

We are a collective of scholars and activists oriented towards a common horizon of emancipatory social and ecological transformation. With this platform, we aim to animate a space to share, debate and critically reflect on research and activist experiences, observations, methodologies, news, events, publications, art, music and other themes and objects related to political ecology.
powered by andromedia
  • About Us
  • Essays
  • Series
  • Resources
  • Events and Calls
  • Art & multimedia
  • Contribute
go