TOWARDS A POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF BIOFUEL
CROPS
JOY CLANCY
TWENTE CENTRE FOR STUDIES IN TECHNOLOGY AND SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT (CSTM), UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE
BIOFUELS FROM FIRST GENERATION CROPS
There are different crops
 Biodiesel – jatropha; palm oil
 Bioethanol – sugarcane; maize
Which crop can/is be grown linked to
 the ecology of soil, water, sunshine of the place (region, locality)
 the particular socio-economic and political characteristics of the place

which influences the model of production, the actors and the
discourses involved
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
2
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
3
POLITICAL ECOLOGY
CONSTRUCTING THE META-ANALYSIS
 Political ecology ‘combines the concerns of ecology and a
broadly defined political economy’ (Blaikie and Brookfield
1987)
 Provides an analysis of human interaction with the natural
environment
 Builds on an understanding of when people use natural
resources for food, fibre and fuel – although less attention
paid to other values (eco-systems services reveals)
 Local level environmental problems do not always originate
at the local level
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
4
POLITICAL ECOLOGY
 Reveals who has access and who has control
over natural resources
 Power within societies unevenly distributed along
lines of class, race, and gender – between
societies
 How is it exercised? Through formal institutions
and other mechanisms – such as discourses
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
5
BIOFUEL DISCOURSES
CONVEY VALUES IN LANGUAGE
 Macro discourses implicitly assume:
priority for economic values
the need to have new ‘clean’ energy supplies for national economic
growth
addressing climate change
social inclusion of rural poor
 Micro-level (local) discourses place a value on:
household or community systems of production
diverse and more plural set of values
 But where do these micro-level discourses get heard?
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
6
BIOFUELS: THE DISCOURSES
THE SOLUTION TO MANY PROBLEMS – OFTEN SIMULTANEOUSLY
 Energy security
 Rural development (pro-poor)
 Climate change
 Environmental degradation (waste land)
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
7
BIOFUELS
THE CAUSE OF MANY PROBLEMS
 Threat to food security (crime against humanity)
 Damage to eco-systems
 Transformation of rural societies from integrated small-scale
production systems to agro-industries
 Human rights violations
 Land ‘grabbing’
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
8
DISCOURSES OF THE RURAL POOR
INCLUSION OR EXCLUSION FROM BIOFUELS PRODUCTION CHAINS?
 Rural poor farmers are not homogeneous
 Inclusion isn’t always wanted & is resisted
Not only financial values but modes of production
Brazil – women’s social position was undermined by switch of
production mode
 Terms of incorporation are important
Brazil – farmers lease land for biofuels retain identity as farmers –
culturally important and gives access to benefits
India and Africa – women enter when new production spaces are
created
 Reasons for inclusion: status; consolidate his/her power in social
relationships; access to knowledge & resources
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
9
DISCOURSE OF ‘WASTE LAND’
WHOSE WASTE LAND?
 Response to ‘competition with food’ – use ‘waste’ land – particularly
India and parts of Africa
 Whose ‘waste’ land? Who defines this? Who benefits?
 Land not used for agricultural production (crops & animal grazing) or
commercial forestry is productive
 Sites of biodiversity with eco-system functions (both biological and
human services)
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
10
CONTESTED AREAS
WHO WINS THE POWER STRUGGLE?
 Advocates of biofuels use the discourses of their opponents to their
advantage
 Waste land – response to food versus fuel
 Slave labour in sugar cane – improve working conditions through
mechanisation – consequence is unemployment
 Who wins?
 NGOs as champions of the rural farmer? Promotors of standards
 Poor farmers struggle to reach the standards.
 CSR – tends to address health & safety not rights
tends to be international companies with reputation to protect
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
11
THE VILLAIN OF THE PIECE
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
12
JATROPHA CURCAS:
WHAT FARMERS ARE TOLD
 produces oil-rich seeds, is known to thrive
on eroded lands, and to require only
limited amounts of water, nutrients and
capital inputs
 But…………………..
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
13
JATROPHA CURCAS:
IN PRACTICE
 Yields are generally reported as lower for farmers (both under irrigated
and rain-fed) than under controlled conditions
 To be economic requires irrigation
 Disillusioned small and marginal farmers who opt for exclusion
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
14
WHAT WE DON’T KNOW
ABOUT ECOLOGY OF JATROPHA
• How Jatropha performs in a wide variety
of habitats eg where will it be invasive?
• Not been subject to breeding programmes
eg for higher and more consistent yields
but reduced gene pool
• Uncertain what the optimal levels of
inputs are
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
15
WHERE IS THE POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF BIOETHANOL?
 There is quite a literature about the
political economy of sugarcane and maize
(USA)
 Ecology seems to be missing
 Water use? Chemical inputs?
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
16
POLITICAL ECONOMY OF US MAIZE
AN ANALYSIS THAT STOPS PART WAY?
 US exports maize – it has kept to export volume quotas but price is
rising
 Why are non-food deficit countries importing maize (eg Mexico, South
Africa, Ghana)?
 Local farmers cannot compete on price but now they can – signs they
are replanting
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
17
CLOSING REFLECTION
 Negative publicity of 1st generation biofuels promotes 2nd and 3rd
generation biofuels which undermines competitive advantage of the
South
 Domestic markets not export markets in the South
 Too simplistic to assume a priori that export-oriented or commercial
crops have negative ecological and social effects
 Technological fix for what are complex, inter-related social, economic,
political and ecological problems which can’t be reduced to the level of
“Tweets”
Political Ecology of Biofuels
27 March
2013
18