DW News · Feb 17, 2026 · Collected from RSS
Nicaraguan farm workers poisoned by the pesticide Nemagon are ready to hear the ruling in their decades-long case against US multinationals. Farmers worldwide still rely on noxious chemicals, often exported from the EU.
Farm workers left sick or sterilized after working with a toxic pesticide on Nicaraguan banana plantations in the late 20th century await a ruling on their case in Paris court this week. Thousands of workers in and around plantations in the Chinandega region suffered infertility, chronic kidney failure, skin conditions or cancer after prolonged exposure to Nemagon. The pesticide contained dibromochloropropane (DBCP), and was used to kill pests in the soil. In 2006, Nicaraguan courts ordered Shell, Dow Chemical and Occidental Chemical, which sold the pesticide, to pay victims $805 million (about €640 million at the time) in damages and interest. All attempts to collect the compensation in the US have so far failed. Nemagon was banned in the US in 1977 after it was found to cause sterility in male workers, but was exported abroad and used — in Nicaragua and elsewhere — well into the 1980s. Victims of Nemagon poisoning in Nicaragua have been waiting many years for some kind of closureImage: AFP "I honestly think it's impossible to quantify the damage," said Grettel Navas, an assistant professor at the University of Chile specializing in toxic pollution and public health. Navas, who interviewed victims in Nicaragua in 2017 and 2018, told DW by email that workers had been waiting decades for some sort of meaningful compensation. "Perhaps the greatest harm has been the emotional and physical exhaustion. More than 30 years of fighting for recognition, accountability and justice — and still feeling that justice never arrives. Many workers died while waiting." Navas added that Nemagon victims in Nicaragua have been unable to count on government support in their fight. "Public institutions are now extremely weak in Nicaragua when it comes to addressing this case — and more broadly, when we think about the kind of institutional strength that is needed to protect citizens from pesticide exposure and ecological damage," she said. Pesticides banned in EU still exported abroad Nemagon is no longer in use, but dozens of other toxic pesticides are still employed by farmers on crops around the world — prohibited in Europe, but free to be exported to Asia, Africa and Latin America. Pesticides banned in Europe linked to bees deaths in KenyaTo view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Pesticide residue can end up contaminating air, water and soil, killing non-targeted animals and decreasing biodiversity. Long-term exposure to these exports — herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and nematicides — significantly increases the risk of infertility, miscarriage, respiratory and neurological problems and different types of cancers. "Europe promised in 2020 to deliver measures to stop this practice," said Angeliki Lysimachou, head of science and policy at Pesticide Action Network Europe. "And they haven't done anything." In October 2020, the European Commission pledged to "lead by example" and "ensure that hazardous chemicals banned in the European Union are not produced for export." Pesticides that are banned in the EU are still exported for use abroadImage: Raminder Pal Singh/epa/picture alliance But since then, the EU's export trade in prohibited pesticides has actually expanded, as revealed in an investigation by Unearthed and Public Eye in September 2025. "Under EU export policy, the EU can still export to Latin American countries pesticides that are banned in the EU," said Frances Verkamp, a trade campaigner at NGO Friends of the Earth Europe. "This is honestly a disgusting form of neocolonialism, because it suggests that the bodies of people in the Global South and their lands are less worthy of protection than European bodies and lands." Cash crops depend on pesticides Soledad Castro Vargas, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Zurich, has been documenting the lingering effects of these pesticides in her home country, Costa Rica — a country generally considered to be an environmental leader. Speaking to DW from the capital, San Jose, she recounted how communities which had previously relied on EU-exported herbicides like bromacil, used on the lucrative cash crop pineapple, and the fungicide chlorothalonil, sprayed on small-scale vegetable farms, were still finding residue in their soil and drinking water today. Chlorothalonil, which can contaminate groundwater and has been linked to cancer, was banned for use in the EU in 2019 but only four years later in Costa Rica. Bromacil, another possible carcinogen, has been off the market in the EU since 2009, but was used in Costa Rica until 2017. "What I saw in the last [few] weeks, it was devastating," said Castro, who has been following the issue for nearly 20 years. She said the small farming communities she has visited don't have the resources to monitor contamination levels, remove pesticide residues or build develop new water sources free from pollutants. Added to that, she said, were the difficulties farmers face growing crops in a warm, humid environment, which offer ideal conditions for pests and pathogens. Latin American cash crops like banana have been treated with pesticides for decades Image: AP Photo/picture alliance "That's the paradox of tropical agriculture," she said. "These conditions that allow year-round food production are the same ones that create environments [in which it's] harsher to produce." Toxic: Coal ash, pesticides & politicsTo play this audio please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 audioThese conditions are exploited by agribusiness, in which a single valuable product often grown for export can facilitate the spread of infestations due to their uniformity. "Monocrops enhance pests and pathogens," she said — adding that this can, in turn, make it even harder for farmers to avoid becoming dependent on pesticides. Synthetic pesticide use, Castro, Navas and other researchers highlighted in an October 2025 study, is common among industrial farms and smallholders. And it's on the rise, especially in low-income and lower-middle-income countries. According to a recent report by the Food and Agriculture Organization, global pesticide use has doubled since 1990. Between 2013 and 2023 use in agriculture increased by 14%, though it dropped 2% at the end of that period. Actual usage data may higher, due to limited reporting. But various studies have found that around two-thirds of the world's agricultural land is at risk of pesticide contamination. "Industrial agriculture, global markets, debt structures and corporate input systems have created a form of structural dependency," said Navas, making it even harder for farmers to shift toward more sustainable solutions. Using nature's natural predators to protect cropsTo view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Farmers need support to make sustainable shift A UN special report on food in 2017 highlighted some alternatives. Among them are farming practices adapted to local conditions, crop rotation to protect soil health and suppress weeds and cultivating biodiversity to support natural pest control — using ducks to eat nuisance bugs, for example. These practices are part of what's known as agroecology, and the report said its use was capable of delivering enough food to adequately feed the entire world. Agroecology practices — like using ducks to eat snails and bugs — can help to reduce pesticide use on farms, like here in Cape TownImage: Esa Alexander/REUTERS But for farmers to get off the "chemical pesticide treadmill," as Lysimachou put it, they need support — from governments, independent advisory systems and farming unions — to redesign their cropping systems to work with nature, looking beyond short-term profits for long-term gains. "The farmers that have done it, they are very happy with the result, but they are doing it on their own risk. It often reduces costs and increases profitability, but they are making the transition without financial support," said Lysimachou. "This is not something that everybody has a privilege to do." That support, said Navas, should include stricter regulations that apply equally for farmers no matter where they are in the world. "If a pesticide is proven to cause severe health effects in the European Union, it is highly likely to pose similar risks in Latin America," she said. "Human biology does not change across borders — so why should regulatory protections differ?" Edited by: Tamsin Walker Can we cut down on pesticide use with 'plant vaccines'?To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video