IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i2p440-d198049.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Case of ‘Muddling Through’? The Politics of Renewing Glyphosate Authorization in the European Union

Author

Listed:
  • Jale Tosun

    (Institute of Political Science, Heidelberg University, Bergheimer Straße 58, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany
    Heidelberg Center for the Environment, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 229, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany)

  • Herman Lelieveldt

    (University College Roosevelt, P.O. Box 94, NL-4330 AB Middelburg, The Netherlands)

  • Trevelyan S. Wing

    (Institute of Political Science, Heidelberg University, Bergheimer Straße 58, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany
    Heidelberg Center for the Environment, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 229, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany)

Abstract

Between 2012 and 2017, the European Commission struggled to achieve the renewal of glyphosate, an active ingredient of some broad-spectrum herbicides. As indicated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the chemical kills or suppresses all plant types; when applied at lower rates, it is a plant-growth regulator and desiccant. Glyphosate is used worldwide for agricultural and non-agricultural purposes. Once uncontroversial, new scientific evidence concerning the potential hazards of the substance has sparked a considerable debate in public and political spheres. In light of this sustained controversy, it came as a surprise when a qualified majority of European Union member states voted in favor of the Commission’s proposal to renew the approval of glyphosate for another five years. How was this outcome reached after many ‘no opinion’ votes? How are the member states dealing with the authorization’s renewal? Relying on document analyses and process tracing, we show in this study that the aforementioned renewal was attained due to a change in position on the part of German delegates, who voted in favor of the proposal instead of abstaining. By examining how the member states are addressing the renewal of the authorization, we found that both the countries that opposed renewal and those that supported it are now taking steps to reduce the use—or preparing the phaseout—of glyphosate. Due to domestic political considerations, however, the realization of these steps has so far proven to be difficult.

Suggested Citation

  • Jale Tosun & Herman Lelieveldt & Trevelyan S. Wing, 2019. "A Case of ‘Muddling Through’? The Politics of Renewing Glyphosate Authorization in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:440-:d:198049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/440/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/2/440/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grace Skogstad, 2011. "Contested Accountability Claims and GMO Regulation in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(4), pages 895-915, July.
    2. Monika Mühlböck & Jale Tosun, 2018. "Responsiveness to Different National Interests: Voting Behaviour on Genetically Modified Organisms in the Council of the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 385-402, March.
    3. Tiziano Gomiero, 2016. "Soil Degradation, Land Scarcity and Food Security: Reviewing a Complex Challenge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-41, March.
    4. Candel, Jeroen J.L. & Pereira, Laura, 2017. "Towards integrated food policy: Main challenges and steps ahead," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 89-92.
    5. David Griggs & Mark Stafford-Smith & Owen Gaffney & Johan Rockström & Marcus C. Öhman & Priya Shyamsundar & Will Steffen & Gisbert Glaser & Norichika Kanie & Ian Noble, 2013. "Sustainable development goals for people and planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7441), pages 305-307, March.
    6. Tiziano Gomiero, 2015. "Are Biofuels an Effective and Viable Energy Strategy for Industrialized Societies? A Reasoned Overview of Potentials and Limits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-31, June.
    7. Ulrich Hartung & Simon Schaub, 2018. "The Regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms on a Local Level: Exploring the Determinants of Cultivation Bans," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-23, September.
    8. Mark Howells & H-Holger Rogner, 2014. "Assessing integrated systems," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(4), pages 246-247, April.
    9. Ronald Herring & Robert Paarlberg, 2016. "The Political Economy of Biotechnology," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 397-416, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Simon Schaub, 2021. "Public contestation over agricultural pollution: a discourse network analysis on narrative strategies in the policy process," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 783-821, December.
    2. Veronika Villnow & Meike Rombach & Vera Bitsch, 2019. "Examining German Media Coverage of the Re-Evaluation of Glyphosate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ingrid Boas & Frank Biermann & Norichika Kanie, 2016. "Cross-sectoral strategies in global sustainability governance: towards a nexus approach," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 449-464, June.
    2. Jale Tosun, 2017. "On the sustained importance of attitudes toward technological risks and benefits in policy studies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 563-572, December.
    3. Dona Azizi, 2020. "Access and allocation in food governance, a decadal view 2008–2018," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 323-338, June.
    4. Tiziano Gomiero, 2016. "Soil Degradation, Land Scarcity and Food Security: Reviewing a Complex Challenge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-41, March.
    5. Timothy E. Crews & Brian E. Rumsey, 2017. "What Agriculture Can Learn from Native Ecosystems in Building Soil Organic Matter: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, April.
    6. Dona Azizi, 0. "Access and allocation in food governance, a decadal view 2008–2018," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    7. Vincent Smith & Justus H. H. Wesseler & David Zilberman, 2021. "New Plant Breeding Technologies: An Assessment of the Political Economy of the Regulatory Environment and Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, March.
    8. Martinico-Perez, Marianne Faith G. & Schandl, Heinz & Fishman, Tomer & Tanikawa, Hiroki, 2018. "The Socio-Economic Metabolism of an Emerging Economy: Monitoring Progress of Decoupling of Economic Growth and Environmental Pressures in the Philippines," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 155-166.
    9. Wang, Can & Zheng, Xinzhu & Cai, Wenjia & Gao, Xue & Berrill, Peter, 2017. "Unexpected water impacts of energy-saving measures in the iron and steel sector: Tradeoffs or synergies?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 1119-1127.
    10. Timothy E. Crews & Douglas J. Cattani, 2018. "Strategies, Advances, and Challenges in Breeding Perennial Grain Crops," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-7, June.
    11. Io Carydi & Athanasios Koutsianas & Marios Desyllas, 2023. "People, Crops, and Bee Farming: Landscape Models for a Symbiotic Network in Greece," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-25, February.
    12. Dai, Jiangyu & Wu, Shiqiang & Han, Guoyi & Weinberg, Josh & Xie, Xinghua & Wu, Xiufeng & Song, Xingqiang & Jia, Benyou & Xue, Wanyun & Yang, Qianqian, 2018. "Water-energy nexus: A review of methods and tools for macro-assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 393-408.
    13. Vincenzo Formisano & Bernardino Quattrociocchi & Maria Fedele & Mario Calabrese, 2018. "From Viability to Sustainability: The Contribution of the Viable Systems Approach (VSA)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    14. Petia Kostadinova, 2015. "Improving the Transparency and Accountability of EU Institutions: The Impact of the Office of the European Ombudsman," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 1077-1093, September.
    15. Zhijiang Li & Decai Tang & Mang Han & Brandon J. Bethel, 2018. "Comprehensive Evaluation of Regional Sustainable Development Based on Data Envelopment Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, October.
    16. Steve O’Hern & Roni Utriainen & Hanne Tiikkaja & Markus Pöllänen & Niina Sihvola, 2021. "Exploratory Analysis of Pedestrian Road Trauma in Finland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    17. Carmen Ruiz-Puente & Daniel Jato-Espino, 2020. "Systemic Analysis of the Contributions of Co-Located Industrial Symbiosis to Achieve Sustainable Development in an Industrial Park in Northern Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-28, July.
    18. Rositsa T. Ilieva, 2017. "Urban Food Systems Strategies: A Promising Tool for Implementing the SDGs in Practice †," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-35, September.
    19. Giorgio Mion & Angela Broglia & Angelo Bonfanti, 2019. "Do Codes of Ethics Reveal a University’s Commitment to Sustainable Development? Evidence from Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    20. Xiaoli Zhao & Pavel Castka & Cory Searcy, 2020. "ISO Standards: A Platform for Achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:440-:d:198049. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.