Next Article in Journal
Comprehensive Land Carrying Capacities of the Cities in the Shandong Peninsula Blue Economic Zone and their Spatio-Temporal Variations
Next Article in Special Issue
Critical Issues at the Upstream Level in Sustainable Supply Chain Management of Agri-Food Industries: Evidence from Pakistan’s Citrus Industry
Previous Article in Journal
Embodied Energy Flow Patterns of the Internal and External Industries of Manufacturing in China
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Future Challenges of Food and Agriculture: An Integrated Analysis of Trends and Solutions
Open AccessEditor’s ChoiceArticle

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

1
Institute of Political Science, Heidelberg University, Bergheimer Straße 58, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany
2
Heidelberg Center for the Environment, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 229, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
3
University College Roosevelt, P.O. Box 94, NL-4330 AB Middelburg, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(2), 440; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020440
Received: 3 December 2018 / Revised: 12 January 2019 / Accepted: 14 January 2019 / Published: 16 January 2019
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. View Full-Text
Keywords: comitology procedure; domestic politics; European Union; glyphosate; voting behavior comitology procedure; domestic politics; European Union; glyphosate; voting behavior
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Tosun, J.; Lelieveldt, H.; Wing, T.S. A Case of ‘Muddling Through’? The Politics of Renewing Glyphosate Authorization in the European Union. Sustainability 2019, 11, 440. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020440

AMA Style

Tosun J, Lelieveldt H, Wing TS. A Case of ‘Muddling Through’? The Politics of Renewing Glyphosate Authorization in the European Union. Sustainability. 2019; 11(2):440. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020440

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tosun, Jale; Lelieveldt, Herman; Wing, Trevelyan S. 2019. "A Case of ‘Muddling Through’? The Politics of Renewing Glyphosate Authorization in the European Union" Sustainability 11, no. 2: 440. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020440

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop