A lei dos agrotóxicos sob a ótica dos produtores rurais

Marques, Mauricio Dias; Braga, Sergio Silva; Forti, Juliane Cristina

doi:10.20435/inter.v0i0.1828

Mauricio Dias Marques

Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Tupã, São Paulo, Brasil.

Mauricio Dias Marques: Master in Agribusiness and Development, UNESP/FCE/Tupã. Specialist in Tax Law by the Brazilian Institute of Tax Studies (IBET). Graduated in Letters from the University of Nove de Julho (UNINOVE), in Theology by the Batista Theological Faculty of Araraquara, in Law at the Faculty of Law of the Alta Paulista (FADAP), in Business Administration and in Accounting Sciences at the Faculty of Accounting and Administration Sciences of Tupã (FACCAT). He works as a university professor and spell checker. E-mail:mdmarques1985@gmail.com, Orcid:http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5844-3942

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5844-3942

Sergio Silva Braga Junior

Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Tupã, São Paulo, Brasil.

Sergio Silva Braga Junior: PhD in Business Administration from Uninove. Master in Administration of Organizations from FEARP/USP. Graduated in Business Administration from Unitoledo. Professor of the Graduate Program in Agribusiness and Development of UNESP/FCE/Tupã and the Post-Graduate Program in Administration of FCAV/UNESP/Jaboticabal. E-mail:sergio@tupa.unesp.br, Orcid:http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4979-1988

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4979-1988

Juliane Cristina Forti

Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Tupã, São Paulo, Brasil.

Juliane Cristina Forti: PhD in Chemistry from the University of São Paulo with a degree from the Université de Poitiers, France. Master in Chemistry from the University of São Paulo. Graduated in Chemistry by USP (Bachelor of Technology, Bachelor in Chemistry and Physics). The areas of research and development include: Wastewater treatment, water and soil analysis, advanced oxidative electrochemical processes and fuel bio-cells. Professor of the Biosystems Engineering Course of the Faculty of Sciences and Engineering of the Paulista State University (UNESP), Campus de Tupã, SP and Publisher of the Brazilian Journal of Biosystems Engineering (BIOENG). E-mail: juliane@tupa.unesp.br, Orcid: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8084-2336

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8084-2336

Mauricio Dias Marques: Master in Agribusiness and Development, UNESP/FCE/Tupã. Specialist in Tax Law by the Brazilian Institute of Tax Studies (IBET). Graduated in Letters from the University of Nove de Julho (UNINOVE), in Theology by the Batista Theological Faculty of Araraquara, in Law at the Faculty of Law of the Alta Paulista (FADAP), in Business Administration and in Accounting Sciences at the Faculty of Accounting and Administration Sciences of Tupã (FACCAT). He works as a university professor and spell checker. E-mail:mdmarques1985@gmail.com, Orcid:http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5844-3942

Sergio Silva Braga Junior: PhD in Business Administration from Uninove. Master in Administration of Organizations from FEARP/USP. Graduated in Business Administration from Unitoledo. Professor of the Graduate Program in Agribusiness and Development of UNESP/FCE/Tupã and the Post-Graduate Program in Administration of FCAV/UNESP/Jaboticabal. E-mail:sergio@tupa.unesp.br, Orcid:http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4979-1988

Juliane Cristina Forti: PhD in Chemistry from the University of São Paulo with a degree from the Université de Poitiers, France. Master in Chemistry from the University of São Paulo. Graduated in Chemistry by USP (Bachelor of Technology, Bachelor in Chemistry and Physics). The areas of research and development include: Wastewater treatment, water and soil analysis, advanced oxidative electrochemical processes and fuel bio-cells. Professor of the Biosystems Engineering Course of the Faculty of Sciences and Engineering of the Paulista State University (UNESP), Campus de Tupã, SP and Publisher of the Brazilian Journal of Biosystems Engineering (BIOENG). E-mail: juliane@tupa.unesp.br, Orcid: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8084-2336

Construct	Nº	Questions	Legal Basis
A - Return empty packages in accordance with the instructions received at the commercial establishment where the pesticide was purchased or the collector stations.	P-01	I am always informed there is a requirement to return the empty packages of agricultural pesticides.	Art. 7º, II, "d" of Law 7.802/1989 and Art. 53 of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-02	I read the instructions on the leaflets and labels of agricultural pesticides before using them.	Art. 6º § 2º; Art. 7º, IV of Law 7.802/1989 and Art. 52 of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-03	I read the instructions on the leaflets and labels of agricultural pesticides for the return of the packages.	Art. 6º § 2º of Law 7.802/1989 and Art. 52 of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-08	I always return the packages to the address indicated on the purchase invoice.	Art. 53 § 2º of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-09	When I have out-of-date agricultural pesticides, I return them.	Art. 6º § 2º of Law Lei 7.802/1989 and Art. 53 § 4º of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-10	I always pay the costs to transport the packages to the collector station.	Art. 6º § 2º of Law 7.802/1989 and Art. 53 of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-12	I always return the empty packages of agricultural pesticides to the retailers where I purchased them.	Art. 6º § 2º of Law 7.802/1989 and Art. 53 of Decr. 4.074/2002
B - Perform the triple washing of the empty packages, necessary preparation and storage on the rural property before returning the packages.	P-04	I have been informed about the need to prepare the packages for correct disposal.	Art. 6º § 4º of Law 7.802/1989 and Art. 53 § 5º of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-05	I have been informed that I need to store them temporarily in appropriate locations on my property.	Art. 6º of Law 7.802/1989 and Art. 53 of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-06	During purchase, the retailer gives instructions on washing, packaging, storage, transportation and return of the packages.	Art. 7º, II, "d" of Law 7.802/1989 and Annex IX in the Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-07	I disable the package right after triple washing it.	Art. 7º, II, "d" of Law 7.802/1989 and Annex IX in the Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-17	I triple wash the packages when told to do so in the leaflet instructions.	Art. 6º § 3º of Law 7.802/1989 and Art. 53 § 6º of Decr. 4.074/2002
C - Keep available for the inspection agencies the return receipts of empty packages.	P-11	The Collector Station always gives me a receipt for packages returned.	Art. 53 § 3º and Art. 55 of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-13	I keep archived for inspection purposes the purchase invoices and return receipt for the empty packages.	Art. 53 § 3º of Decr. 4.074/2002
	P-14	When I make a new purchase of agricultural pesticide, I am charged by the retailer for the empty packages from the last purchase.	Art. 19 sole paragraph of Law 7.802/1989
	P-15	I am regularly inspected regarding the storage, transportation and return of empty packages of agricultural pesticides.	Art. 12A of Law 7.802/1989
	P-16	I am aware of the penalties applied for inadequate disposal of the empty packages.	Arts. 14 and 15 of Law 7.802/1989

Evaluated Question	Crossover	Chi-Square	Analysis
P-1 - I am always informed there is a requirement to return the empty packages of agricultural pesticides.	How often I return packages.	0.006	There is consistency in the responses because for the 16 who fully agreed about having known about the requirement to return empty packages, at least 11 said that they return them and of the 13 who disagreed, six responded that they do not return them and seven vary in their return timing, showing uncertainty in return.
P-4 - I have been informed about the need to prepare the packages for correct disposal.	How often I return packages.	0.003	There is also some consistency here because for the 35 who agreed and/or fully agreed about having information about the need to prepare the packages for correct disposal, 22 said they return them even if their timing in doing so varies. Of those who disagreed or were indifferent, the majority said they do not return the packages.
P-6 - During purchase, the retailer gives instructions for washing procedures, packaging, storage, transportation and return of the packages.	How often I return packages.	0.018	There is consistency in the responses as 11 of those who agreed or fully agreed about receiving instructions for washing procedures, packaging, storage, transportation and return of the packages, nine said they return them, and of the 30 who disagreed or fully disagreed, 18 said they do not return them, and seven said their return timing varies.
P-8 - I always return packages to the address indicated on the purchase invoice.	How often I return packages.	0.006	The nine who agreed or fully agreed when asked always return packages to the address indicated on the purchase invoice, all said they return packages even if their timing varies, and of the 26 who disagreed or fully disagreed, 20 strongly stated they do not return them.

Evaluated Question	Crossover	Chi-Square	Analysis
P-10 - I always pay the costs to transport packages to the collector station.	How often I return packages.	0.000	There is accentuated consistency in the responses, as of the seven who agreed or fully agreed about paying the costs to transport packages to the Collector Station, all said they return them; and of the 34 who disagreed or fully disagreed, 16 said they do not return packages, and 11 said their return timing varies.
P-10 - I always pay the costs to transport packages to the collector station.	Cultivation group.	0.018	There is a balance in the producer's distribution among types of cultivation, with 18, 16 and 14, respectively, in temporary culture, horticulture and permanent culture. Additionally, of the 30 who fully disagreed about paying the costs to transport packages to the Collector Station, 8, 12 and 10, respectively, are in temporary culture, horticulture and permanent culture.
P-10 - I always pay the costs to transport packages to the collector station.	Segmentation of the area by IBGE.	0.032	There is a certain proportionality among the responses regarding paying the costs to transport packages to the Collector Station and the size of the harvested area, as of the 30 who fully disagreed, 23 cultivate areas smaller than five hectares, which suggests that, for them, the cost of empty package transportation is high, so they tend, when they return packages, to use favors from other large-sized producers, as noted in the responses when the data collection was performed.
P-12 - I always return the empty packages of agricultural pesticides to the retailers where I purchased them.	How often I return packages.	0.021	There is consistency in the responses, as 27 of those who responded that they disagreed or fully disagreed about returning packages to the retailers, 17 responded they do not return them and the other eight that their timing of return varies. Of the four who responded that they completely agreed about returning packages, all said that they return packages between one and two years from the date of purchase.
P-13 - I keep archived for inspection purposes the purchase invoices and the return receipts for empty packages.	How often I return packages.	0.016	Of 25 who disagreed or fully disagreed about keeping, for purposes of inspection, the purchase invoices and the package return receipts, 15 said they do not return packages and eight said that their timing of return varies. However, of 17 who agreed or fully agreed about keeping the invoices and return receipts, 11 said they return them even if their timing in doing so varies.

Evaluated Question	Crossover	Chi-Square	Analysis
P-14 - When I make a new purchase of agricultural pesticide, I am charged by the retailer for the empty packages from the last purchase.	How often I return packages.	0.043	Of 42 who fully disagreed about being charged by the retailer for empty packages from the last purchase, 21 said that they do not return packages and 12 that their timing of return varies. Of five who agreed or fully agreed about being charged by the retailer, four said that they return packages.
P-16 - I am aware of the penalties applied for inadequate disposal of empty packages.	How often I return packages.	0.012	Of 30 respondents who agreed or fully agreed about knowing the penalties for the inadequate disposal of empty packages, 11 do not return them, and 12 said that their timing of return varies. In contrast, of 14 who disagreed or fully disagreed about knowing the penalties, seven do not return packages.
P-16 - I am aware of the penalties applied for inadequate disposal of the empty packages.	Segmentation of the area by IBGE.	0.043	There is a certain balance between the responses regarding knowing the penalties for inadequate disposal of empty packages and the size of the harvested area, as of the 30 who agreed or fully agreed, 19 cultivate areas smaller than five hectares. Of the 14 who disagreed or fully disagreed, 10 also cultivate areas smaller than five hectares. This leads us to consider that for them (the small producers), the responsibility is more keenly felt.

How often do I return packages?
	Frequency	Percentage	Valid Percentage	Accumulative Percentage
More than once per year	12	25	25	25
Once every 1-2 years	2	4.2	4.2	29.2
Varies	12	25	25	54.2
Do not return	22	45.8	45.8	100
Total	48	100	100

Comparative cases	May or may not return packages (%)	Tendency to not return packages (%)	Performed analysis	Percentage tendency to not comply with the legislation (%)
Nogueira and Dantas (2013)NOGUEIRA, Viviane Barreto Motta; DANTAS, Renilson Targino. Gestão Ambiental de Embalagens Vazias de Agrotóxicos. Revista Tema, Campina Grande, PB, v. 14, n. 20/21, Jan./Dec. 2013.	37.5	62.5	The study reports that 37% return, 53.1% burn and 9,4% keep or throw away packages.	62.5
*Lima et al.* (2009)**LIMA, Crislaine Alves Barcellos; GRUTZMACHER, Douglas Daniel; KRUGER, Leandro Rodeghiero; GRUTZMACHER, Anderson Dionei. Diagnóstico da exposição ocupacional de agrotóxicos na principal região produtora de pêssego para indústria do Brasil. Ciência Rural, Santa Maria, RS, v. 39, n. 3, p. 900-3, May/Jun. 2009.	20	80	The study shows that 80% keep packages and may or may not return them.	80
Vezzali (2006)VEZZALI, Fernanda. Opinião - Avanço da soja eleva risco de contaminação de trabalhadores no Piaui. Carta Maior, Brasil, Sept 07 2006. Available in: http://cartamaior.com.br/?/Editoria/Meio-Ambiente/Avanco-da-soja-eleva-risco-de-contaminacao-de-trabalhadores-no-Piaui/3/10629. Access in: 26 Ago. 2016. http://cartamaior.com.br/?/Editoria/Meio...	33.4	66.6	It is established that of nine properties visited, six received a fine for not returning packages.	66.6
IBGE (2005)	38.1	61.9	The statistics show that 600 municipalities had places to receive the packages and 978 disposed of them in open-air dumps.	61.9
Our research	25	75	The Cross-tab determined that only 25% of the respondents had a tendency to comply with the legislation, with their responses consistent.	75

[1] Mauricio Dias Marques: Master in Agribusiness and Development, UNESP/FCE/Tupã. Specialist in Tax Law by the Brazilian Institute of Tax Studies (IBET). Graduated in Letters from the University of Nove de Julho (UNINOVE), in Theology by the Batista Theological Faculty of Araraquara, in Law at the Faculty of Law of the Alta Paulista (FADAP), in Business Administration and in Accounting Sciences at the Faculty of Accounting and Administration Sciences of Tupã (FACCAT). He works as a university professor and spell checker. E-mail:mdmarques1985@gmail.com, Orcid:http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5844-3942

Brasil

Brasil

A lei dos agrotóxicos sob a ótica dos produtores rurais

Resumo: