{"title":"Dumping in the Global Dixie: Circle of Poison and the Contamination of the Global South","authors":"Amy M. Hay","doi":"10.3828/whpge.63837646622491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The 1981 publication of David Weir and Mark Shapiro’s exposé\n Circle of Poison\n almost ten years after the banning of DDT represented how the landscape of understandings about hazardous chemicals and their regulation had changed. The book exposed two things. One was the ways power had reconfigured itself, which in turn highlighted the ways the story\n Silent Spring\n told, which effectively moved hearts and minds to make change happen. One thing that remained hidden, however, to both Rachel Carson and Weir and Shapiro, was the degree to which the chemical industry traded at the local and regional level, conducting international trade, emulating the poor and often bad faith practices of the transnational corporations. The failure of\n Circle\n ’s narrative, coupled with an overlooked and extensive network of mom-and-pop chemical companies, failed to build on\n Silent Spring\n ’s legacy.\n \n \n This article was published open access under a CC BY licence:\n https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0\n .\n","PeriodicalId":42763,"journal":{"name":"Global Environment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/whpge.63837646622491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The 1981 publication of David Weir and Mark Shapiro’s exposé
Circle of Poison
almost ten years after the banning of DDT represented how the landscape of understandings about hazardous chemicals and their regulation had changed. The book exposed two things. One was the ways power had reconfigured itself, which in turn highlighted the ways the story
Silent Spring
told, which effectively moved hearts and minds to make change happen. One thing that remained hidden, however, to both Rachel Carson and Weir and Shapiro, was the degree to which the chemical industry traded at the local and regional level, conducting international trade, emulating the poor and often bad faith practices of the transnational corporations. The failure of
Circle
’s narrative, coupled with an overlooked and extensive network of mom-and-pop chemical companies, failed to build on
Silent Spring
’s legacy.
This article was published open access under a CC BY licence:
https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0
.
1981 年,戴维-威尔和马克-夏皮罗的揭露性著作《毒圈》在滴滴涕被禁用近十年后出版,这表明人们对危险化学品及其监管的认识发生了变化。这本书揭露了两件事。一是权力重组的方式,这反过来又凸显了《寂静的春天》所讲述的故事,它有效地打动了人心,使变革得以实现。然而,对于蕾切尔-卡森、韦尔和夏皮罗来说,有一件事仍被掩盖,那就是化学工业在地方和区域层面进行国际贸易的程度,以及仿效跨国公司的拙劣且往往是恶意的做法。圆环》叙述的失败,再加上被忽视的、广泛的母婴化工企业网络,使得《寂静的春天》未能发扬光大。 本文以 CC BY 许可方式公开发表:https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0 。
期刊介绍:
The half-yearly journal Global Environment: A Journal of History and Natural and Social Sciences acts as a forum and echo chamber for ongoing studies on the environment and world history, with special focus on modern and contemporary topics. Our intent is to gather and stimulate scholarship that, despite a diversity of approaches and themes, shares an environmental perspective on world history in its various facets, including economic development, social relations, production government, and international relations. One of the journal’s main commitments is to bring together different areas of expertise in both the natural and the social sciences to facilitate a common language and a common perspective in the study of history. This commitment is fulfilled by way of peer-reviewed research articles and also by interviews and other special features. Global Environment strives to transcend the western-centric and ‘developist’ bias that has dominated international environmental historiography so far and to favour the emergence of spatially and culturally diversified points of view. It seeks to replace the notion of ‘hierarchy’ with those of ‘relationship’ and ‘exchange’ – between continents, states, regions, cities, central zones and peripheral areas – in studying the construction or destruction of environments and ecosystems.