Abstract
ABSTRACT During the past 25 years, many state governments in the United States have adopted anti-community state preemption laws to preclude local governments from enacting ordinances regulating pesticides. In the absence of local controls, people and property are being adversely effected. The issue accompanying state preemption statutes is whether the laws constitute a reasonable resolution of the positive and negative externalities that accompany pesticide usage. Through a discussion of the tradeoffs involving pesticide preemption, we show that states having divergent agricultural, residential, commercial, and recreational activities might be better served by allowing local governments to govern selected matters involving pesticides. State pesticide preemption laws denigrate local governance and compromise public health and economic well-being. If legislators care about the health of their communities and citizens, they need to repeal preemption laws that prevent appropriate safety regulations by local governments.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
