The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Toxic Injustice: A Transnational History of Exposure and Struggle
Abstract
A history of the pesticide DBCP in the United States and Central America, Toxic Injustice explores the production of both health inequalities and resistance in late twentieth- and early twenty-first-century globalization. In the 1950s and 1980s, DBCP production, regulation, and use created disproportionate risk for Central American banana workers and their—often immigrant—U.S. farmworker counterparts. Despite toxicological evidence of DBCP’s dangers, transnational fruit and chemical corporations produced, used, and sold the pesticide for nearly three decades. Exposed workers developed experiential knowledge of DBCP but had little protection and limited power over working conditions. Beginning in the 1980s, workers in Costa Rica and Nicaragua demanded compensation for sterility and for cancer and other diseases they attributed to DBCP exposure. They demanded justice at the national and transnational scales, bringing lawsuits in the United States and organizing movements at home. Throughout DBCP’s history, corporations and workers alike engaged the state in legal and scientific processes shaped by national borders and domestic democratic traditions, as well as by interstate power dynamics and an ascendant neoliberalism. The successes of the Nicaraguan and Costa Rican movements—though transitory and partial—suggest the state remains an important site of struggle over health and environment on the national and transnational scales.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“This tradition is also quite varied, with some scholars focusing on struggles to fight off particular expressions of empire (Striffler 2002; Lutz 2009; Bohme 2014) or to forge transnational solidarity in the face of imperialism (Edelman 1998; Gill 2009; Striffler 2019).”
From Anthropology and imperialism: Past, present, future (2024) · cites this paper as Bohme 2014
Citations
Cited by
Anthropology and imperialism: Past, present, future
Striffler, S. (2024) · Dialectical Anthropology · doi:10.1007/s10624-024-09725-z · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Bohme, S. R.
- Publisher
- University of California Press
- Published
- 2014-12-05
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review