Pesticide Drift

Author: Nora Lewis

Suggested citation:

Lewis, N. (2026). Pesticide drift. Technology Assessment Project Case Study Library, University of Michigan. https://stpp.fordschool.umich.edu/tap-case-study-library/pesticide-drift

Pesticide Drift

Key Takeaways

• Marginalized communities are often exposed to the greatest occupational hazards, and may not receive the proper safety equipment, training, or information sharing to minimize harms.
• Technologies with "invisibilized" risks are often difficult to track the impacts of, which can minimize information passed from industry to community about risks, and allow the slow accumulation of harm without compensation.
• Profit incentives extend the usage of risky or harmful technologies. This then creates a circular system of harm, where communities and corporations come to depend economically on dangerous technology and practices, but the former is the only one bearing full impacts to health and wellbeing.

What is Pesticide Drift?

• Pesticide drift is any off-site movement of pesticide during its application, which can be damaging to crops, aquatic animals, as well as human health in the form of DNA damage, cancer, and respiratory illnesses (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2024).
  • Bioaccumulation can occur, meaning that harmful chemicals from pesticides accumulate in tissues of organisms. This means that chemicals can impact organisms along the food chain, and ultimately accumulate most greatly by the time they are consumed by humans (Ray & Shaju, 2023).
• Some of the most common causes of pesticide drift are weather (i.e. wind and precipitation that carry pesticide chemicals away from application site), improper sealing of fumigation sites, and applicator carelessness (Ricchio, 2018).
• The UN Environment Program estimates that 385 million cases of non-fatal pesticide poisonings occur every year worldwide, and that there are about 11,000 deaths from pesticide poisonings each year (UN Environment Programme, 2024). Deaths caused by the delayed effects of pesticide exposure are not sufficiently captured in available data, but also claim lives every year.
• The U.S. based Agricultural Health Study (AHS) found that 16% of pesticide applicators reported having a high pesticide exposure event (Keim & Alavanja, 2001). This means that pesticide applicators are at heightened risk for exposure to harmful chemicals in pesticides. 
  • This number also points to fairly frequent exposure, and may allude to insufficient training practices, safety regulations, or protective gear provided for applicators. 
  • Some studies note that application by plane or helicopter caused more likely damage to neighboring properties and inhabitants (Ricchio, 2018).
• It is considered best practice to track temperature (hotter temperatures can vaporize droplets of pesticide and increase their spread via the air), wind (including speed and direction), distance to property lines, and relative humidity.
• In one survey of Midwestern communities, residents were asked to provide recommendations on how they think drift incidents might be reduced in their community (Ricchio, 2018). They said: 
  • Larger penalties and stronger regulations (36%) 
  • More interaction and warning between neighbors (25%) 
  • Better education and training (22%)
  • An emphasis on understanding land-use around a targeted site (20%)
  • More easily available weather information (7%)

How is Pesticide Drift Reported and Regulated?

• Guidelines for reporting pesticide drift amongst states are inconsistent, and only some have suggested the use of drift management plans or require applicators of pesticides to inform neighbors of drift (Ricchio, 2018). Thus, information given to communities on how to report drift can be limited, meaning that there are likely many cases of drift going unreported.
• The "invisibilized" nature of drift and unclear standards for reporting across states mean that it's hard to detect accidental exposure to pesticides. There is also the question of drift occurring across state or even more local community lines. If reporting standards differ in these communities, how are harms obscured and information imperfectly transferred to all affected?

Agencies Regulating Pesticides

• Globally, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) evaluates carcinogenic substances, and the World Health Organization more broadly sets drinking water and air quality guidelines for states to follow.
• There are also many national-level agencies regulating pesticides from country to country, particularly agencies relating to agriculture, the environment, and human health and occupational safety. 
  • In the U.S., these agencies are: 
    • The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
    • Bureau of Land Management
    • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
    • Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
    • American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH)
    • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
    • Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
• These agencies have various duties in regulating pesticides and pesticide applications and drift response, ranging from banning certain substances to regulating working conditions for agricultural workers.
• To get a better picture of what this kind of regulation looks like internationally: 
  • "Of the pesticides used in USA agriculture in 2016, 322 million pounds were of pesticides banned in the EU, 26 million pounds were of pesticides banned in Brazil and 40 million pounds were of pesticides banned in China. Pesticides banned in the EU account for more than a quarter of all agricultural pesticide use in the USA. The majority of pesticides banned in at least two of these three nations have not appreciably decreased in the USA over the last 25 years and almost all have stayed constant or increased over the last 10 years" (Donley, 2019).

How Does Reporting of Pesticide Drift Incidences Go?

• Generally, suspected instances of drift are self-reported by individuals to either the EPA or some state environmental/agricultural agencies (May, 2022). 
  • These reports can happen on online portals connected to these agencies.
• Yet many people aren't aware of how to report drift incidents, and in one public survey, 60% of respondents did not know how to report drift if it occurred (Ricchio, 2018). 
  • This points to an underreporting problem, and wider exposure to pesticide drift than may be reflected in current data.
• Yet there are some efforts to address this problem, and pesticide drift instances in general. In the U.S. for example, the EPA updated their evaluation process of human health risks of pesticide drift to take place during the initial registration/review process when a manufacturer identifies new crops or other uses of pesticide (Figueroa, 2024). 
  • Before this July 2024 change, the EPA often evaluated potential drift concerns of a pesticide as far as 15 years after its initial approval by the agency. 
  • This reform will help make drift concerns a more conscious part of the pesticide approval process (Figueroa, 2024).

Where does Pesticide Drift Happen, and Who is Affected Most?

• Rural regions of the world, such as the "Corn Belt" of the American Midwest for example, are exposed to heightened pesticide drift because of the active agriculture industries in these places (Harrison, 2011). 
  • This reliance on pesticides has allowed for more efficient crop production, and thus more profits for large agricultural companies in particular. 
  • But it has also meant that these communities are particularly hard-hit by the ecological and human health impacts of pesticide drift.
• To break this down, if a home is within 750 meters of cropland, it is associated with a heightened likelihood of herbicide in the home. High herbicide concentrations were also highest in the homes of active farmers (Ward et al., 2006).
  • In connection to advanced nuclear energy technology, how does expanding nuclear energy infrastructure into more people's "backyards" increase the elements of risk?
• In connection to broader conversations about rural access to technology and placement of risky infrastructure under rural "wastelands" myths:
  • How are rural communities particularly impacted by pesticide drift, and more generally targeted for the consumption of pesticides despite the negative impacts that can arise from them?
• Applicators are at the most acute risk of adverse health effects. 
  • Low income individuals and people of color (particularly Mexican Americans and Black Americans) see heightened pesticide biomarkers in blood/urine (Donley et al., 2022). 
  • Additionally, almost all pesticide use in California occurs in the 60% of California zip codes that have the highest percentage of people of color (Donley et al., 2022). 
  • Over half of the glyphosate used in California was applied in the state's eight most impoverished counties, where 53% of residents identified as Hispanic or Latinx compared to the state average of 38% (Donley, 2015). 
  • In 2019, more than eight million pounds of pesticides linked to childhood cancers were used in the 11 California counties that had a majority Latinx population (Weller, 2021).

Non-Proliferation and Dual-Use Connection to Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Energy

• Some synthetic herbicides (like 2,4-D) were used for purposes of war (like Agent Orange, which was used to defoliate crops during the Vietnam War and is linked to serious health problems among populations in Vietnam), as well as for modern agricultural practices. There is a lack of clear evidence on the health side effects of 2,4-D in its herbicide form (Ricchio, 2018). This seems to be a theme with many of these pesticides: there is not a consensus on whether they pose a threat to humans in some cases, and thus there are fairly relaxed regulations on some pesticides in the U.S. This is particularly notable given the above data on how many pesticides are not legal in other major agricultural economies in the world, but are in the U.S. Risk mitigating language is also prevalent in much of the policy surrounding pesticide regulation in the U.S., such as phrases like "not likely carcinogenic to humans" (Ricchio, 2018).

Risk, Profit Motives in Agriculture, and Environmental Justice

• The large-scale incidents of pesticide drift capture public attention or regulatory reform more than smaller, incremental and "everyday" cases of pesticide drift. 
  • Within nuclear spaces, it is these large nuclear incidents that we know most about, and seek to avoid. 
    • How do these conceptions of risk ("big disasters" and not small, less visible accumulations of risk and harm) impact the willingness to adapt a technology or address and regulate potential harms?
• There are clear racial and socioeconomic dynamics in who is dealing directly with pesticides on a day-to-day basis. Immigrant populations who work in the agricultural industry in particular are at heightened risk (Donley et al., 2022). 
  • Poverty, legal status, language barriers, political disenfranchisement, and other forms of social marginalization are widespread in farmworking communities and work to obscure pesticide exposure as a widespread environmental justice issue.

"Crop Protection Industry," as coined by Jill Lindsey Harrison

• Regulatory and political capture by pesticide companies and "Big Ag" limits the creation of meaningful regulations (Harrison, 2011). 
  • Monetary and scientific resources of these stakeholders allows for them to be viewed as "experts" and voices of the field in policy realms. 
  • This skews policy around pesticide regulation away from real crackdowns, and more deeply, acknowledgements of the disproportionate racial and socioeconomic impacts of pesticide drift.
• Pesticide use also calls into question the idea of progress for the sake of progress. 
  • Pesticides and herbicides have been effective for increasing crop yields, but do we fail to weigh the costs and benefits under the guise of techno-scientific innovation?
• The cost-benefit analysis style of American environmentalism often necessitates "egregious harm" to be proven in order for safety to overtake economic growth (Harrison, 2011). 
  • With pesticides, the economic gains (and perhaps enhanced food production) bolstered by pesticides and herbicides are weighed against the health and wellbeing of environments and communities.
• Utilitarian environmental regulatory apparatuses consider how to best manage the environment for capital accumulation, economic efficiency, and growth (Naeeni, 2023) 
  • Often using market-based approaches to write environmental policy and regulations (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2021).
• The "enlightenment" model of modern industrial agriculture sees the investment of resources into technologies and knowledge developed by formally trained, "rational" experts in order to grow specialty crops on an industrial scale (Harrison, 2011). 
  • Pesticides have always been associated with growth and progress, which makes them harder to regulate. How do "rational experts" in the nuclear industry yield their expertise to overpower the voices of others? 
  • How are progress narratives of a technology wielded to minimize incremental, hidden, or racialized harms?

Relevance to Advanced Nuclear Energy

We chose this case as an instance of pollution and contamination risks being "invisibilized," and thus harder to identify and compensate for. Just as many advanced nuclear proponents envision advanced reactors as a way to strengthen rural communities, pesticides have long been viewed as a means to reaching more plentiful and profitable agricultural output in rural regions. At the same time, the risks of contamination and bodily harm that come with pesticides are concentrated among rural communities, propped up by the financial rewards that might be reaped from their usage. This circular system of harm and profits feels applicable to advanced nuclear, as it may bolster energy access in a region, but may also expose these communities to heightened risks in other ways. Pesticide drift stands as an example of harm that may slowly and discreetly accumulate in communities, and then prove difficult to identify and receive compensation for as a result. The uncertain regulatory landscape and self-reporting structuring of pesticide drift regulations can be viewed as an analog for the largely-uncertain landscape of advanced nuclear regulation. In the case of advanced nuclear, this weak regulation may result in less protections for marginalized communities, and the prioritization of profit and clean energy aims over community well-being.

Key Sources

Donley, N., Bullard, R. D., Economos, J., Figueroa, I., Lee, J., Liebman, A. K., Martinez, D. N., & Shafiei, F. (2022). Pesticides and environmental injustice in the USA: Root causes, current regulatory reinforcement and a path forward. BMC Public Health, 22(708).

Harrison, J. L. (2011). Pesticide drift and the pursuit of environmental justice. The MIT Press.

Ricchio, J. L. (2018). Pesticide drift in the Midwest: 2010-2016. University of Iowa.

UN Environment Programme. (2024, October 27). Pesticide persistent organic pollutants.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2024, August 15). Introduction to pesticide drift.

Ward, M. H., Lubin, J., Giglierano, J., Colt, J. S., Wolter, C., Bekiroglu, N., Camann, D., Hartge, P., & Nuckols, J. R. (2006). Proximity to crops and residential exposure to agricultural herbicides in Iowa. Environmental Health Perspectives, 114(6), 893-897.

References

Donley, N. (2015). Lost in the mist: How glyphosate use disproportionately threatens California's most impoverished counties. Center for Biological Diversity.

Donley, N. (2019). The USA lags behind other agricultural nations in banning harmful pesticides. Environmental Health, 18(1), 44.

Donley, N., Bullard, R. D., Economos, J., Figueroa, I., Lee, J., Liebman, A. K., Martinez, D. N., & Shafiei, F. (2022). Pesticides and environmental injustice in the USA: Root causes, current regulatory reinforcement and a path forward. BMC Public Health, 22(708).

Figueroa, A. (2024, July 22). EPA updates protections from pesticide drift for farmworkers, communities. OPB.

Harrison, J. L. (2011). Pesticide drift and the pursuit of environmental justice. The MIT Press.

Keim, S., & Alavanja, M. (2001). Pesticide use by persons who reported a high pesticide exposure event in the Agricultural Health Study. Environmental Research, 85(3), 256-259.

May, E. (2022, March 30). Herbicide drift: How to monitor and report damage to wild plants. Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation.

Naeeni, S. K. (2023). The utilitarian approach to environmental law: Balancing costs and benefits. Interdisciplinary Studies in Society, Law, and Politics, 2(1).

Ray, S., & Shaju, S. T. (2023). Bioaccumulation of pesticides in fish resulting toxicities in humans through food chain and forensic aspects. Environmental Analysis, Health and Toxicology, 38.

Ricchio, J. L. (2018). Pesticide drift in the Midwest: 2010-2016. University of Iowa.

UN Environment Programme. (2024, October 27). Pesticide persistent organic pollutants.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2021). Regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to environmental policy. In Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2024, August 15). Introduction to pesticide drift.

Ward, M. H., Lubin, J., Giglierano, J., Colt, J. S., Wolter, C., Bekiroglu, N., Camann, D., Hartge, P., & Nuckols, J. R. (2006). Proximity to crops and residential exposure to agricultural herbicides in Iowa. Environmental Health Perspectives, 114(6), 893-897.

Weller, M. (2021). There's something in the air, and it causes childhood cancers. Californians for Pesticide Reform.

Photo: Tractor spraying pesticide on field, Germany. Stefan Thiesen / CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons)