European biofuel demand and the impact
on well-being in Mato Grosso
Danielle Akkermans 10508317
Marijn Bank 11887346
Femke Mostert 10699902 Jason Jabroer 11309806
Course Interdisciplinary Project Course Supervisor Anne Uilhoorn
Course Expert Emily Burdfield-Steel
Date 31-05-2020
Content
Abstract 2
Introduction 4
Theoretical Framework 6
Background: Trade relation European Union and Brazil 6
Background: the State of Mato Grosso 6
Causal links of the Theoretical Framework 7
Juxtaposition of biofuels and sustainability 7
Treadmill of Alternative Liquid Fuels 8
Land Grabbing and Land Use Change 9
Narratives & Legitimizing Discourses 9
Ecosystem Services & Well-being 10
Environmental Injustice 11
Research Problem & Sub-questions 12
Interdisciplinary Integration & Methods 13
Stakeholder analysis 14
Narrative analysis 14
Multi-scalar analysis 15
Results and Analysis 16
Stakeholder analysis & Narrative analysis 16
A multi-scalar approach 21
Global significance 22
National significance 22
Local significance of Mato Grosso 23
Land Use Change 24
Mato Grosso and Well-being 25
Conclusions, Discussion and Recommendations 29
Conclusions 29
Discussion 30
Recommendations 31
Abstract
In an attempt to meet the demand of energy consumption in a more sustainable way, the European Union is looking to expand their trade in biofuels with Brazil (Follador et al., 2019). Locally, increased biofuel production can have big spatial and environmental implications, as well as socio-political consequences (Koizumi, 2015). This interdisciplinary project aims to map and analyse these implications for the local communities in the region of Mato Grosso in Brazil, an agriculture intensive area with a fragile ecosystem, by integrating concepts and theories from the fields of artificial intelligence, environmental human geography, political human geography, and spatial planning. The aim of this paper is to answer the following question: “How does EU demand for biofuels and the associated land use affect the well-being of local communities in Mato Grosso?”. In order to do this, insights from a stakeholder analysis, narrative analysis, and multi-scalar analysis have been combined. To create an image of the impact on well-being of local communities, the stakeholder narratives are aligned with environmental and social developments since the 2000s in the region of Mato Grosso. The results show how the agricultural intensification and expansion for the purpose of biofuels is legitimized and solidifies a Treadmill of Alternative Liquid Fuels. Furthermore, the sustainability of biofuels is put in perspective, especially with incorporation of the adverse social, spatial and environmental implications for the vulnerable and marginalized communities in Mato Grosso. The findings suggest the deficit of recognition and procedural justice, as well as an overall shortfall in addressing and mapping of the adverse impacts of the Treadmill of alternative liquid fuels. As this research has been performed with knowledge from predominantly social sciences, further research would greatly benefit from a more technical perspective on sustainability of biofuels and its impact on human well-being from other disciplines.
Introduction
The growing concerns of climate change push towards an increase in global biofuel demand (Bicalho et al., 2016; Renckens et al., 2017). The European Union (EU) has been promoting the production of biofuels as a sustainable alternative to fossil fuels since the 2000s, and has taken a leading role in the development of legislation and standards for biofuels (Afionis and Stringer, 2012). In 2019, the European Commission (EC) has published an analysis of the possible environmental consequences of expanding the biofuel demand of the EU in Brazil. The EU concluded that expansion of biofuel demand can be done sustainably, provided that the croplands are adequately governed and monitored. (Follador et al., 2019). Brazil is the second largest global producer of biofuels after the United States and the largest exporter of agricultural commodities to the European Union (Bicalho et al., 2016). These biofuels are made from sugarcane and soybeans, among other crops, which in turn require scarce land to grow. The required farmland in Brazil is provided by the cutting down of rainforest and the repurposing of pastures, which damage the environment and dislocate people (McKay et al., 2016). Multiple studies have shown that enhanced demand for biofuel crops has a strong impact on local agriculture (Banse et al., 2011). However, the current president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, claims that the biofuel trade flow from Brazil to other continents (as shown in figure 1) has had a positive impact on Brazil’s economy and has increased its national welfare and quality of life. Therefore, they are of the opinion that this trade flows should be preserved and augmented (Guimarães & Piefer, 2017; Costa, 2020; Ferrante & Fearnside, 2020).
Figure 1: World’s biomass trade flows including bioethanol and biodiesel from soy and sugar (Welfle, 2017).
A case study of Mato Grosso will be used in order to scrutinize the effect of the increasing demand for biofuels on the local community in directly affected areas. The Midwest region of Brazil consists of three provinces of which Mato Grosso is one, (figure 2) and has shown the highest increase in the area cultivated with sugarcane, which corresponds to 13% of the total sugarcane area in Brazil (Meyer, 2013). Mato Grosso also contains the largest and most technologically intensive soybean plantations in the country (Cacho, 2016).
Figure 2: Location of Mato Grosso. a) Brazil relative to South America; b) Mato Grosso relative to Brazil; c) The biomes within Mato Grosso (Simoes et al., 2020).
This leads to the following research question: “How does EU demand for biofuels and the associated land use affect the well-being of local communities in Mato Grosso?”. The demand for biofuels relates to a multitude of theories and concepts from different perspectives and therefore requires an interdisciplinary approach. This will be useful in tackling the complexity of the accompanied problems and opportunities provided by the market for biofuels. The supply and demand for biofuels and its supposed ability to serve as a sustainable solution touches upon several scientific disciplines and sectoral research practices. For instance, the rhetoric and rationale behind support for alternative liquid fuels (biofuels) according to Gasteyer (2013) has been around its positive environmental attributes and its ability to produce ‘energy-security’. Yet it becomes more and more clear that negative trade-offs are made in other aspects and sectors (food, water) proving the need for integrative research. The global economic investments in the ‘biofuel project’ are intrinsically linked with the ecological system that provides food, energy and water, referred to as the Food-Water-Energy Nexus (Smajgl, 2016). Furthermore, in order to discover the contested narrative of the stakeholders involved, and to clarify the positive attributes and the consequential trade-offs of the creation of a biofuel market, research from different disciplines have to be combined in order to draw conclusions about the actual sustainability of commodities like biofuels. Sustainability and well-being in itself can also be called boundary concepts, which allow multiple knowledge domains to interface, as they are concepts which can be interpreted in many different ways ( Scoones, 2009). This means the lining up of arguments for and against biofuels requires knowledge from more than one discipline.
Theoretical Framework
Background: Trade relation European Union and Brazil
Since 2000, the global production of biofuels has grown exponentially as a result of the search for renewable alternatives for fossil fuels. Local policies in various forms that have been implemented in the following years, to promote both the supply of and demand for biofuels, are the main drivers for this growth (Lamers et al., 2011). The European Union has been widely regarded as having a leading position in the development of sustainability policy worldwide since the 1990s, and has been actively promoting biofuels as an alternative to fossil fuels since the early 2000s (Afionis and Stringer, 2012). In 2018, the EU published its Updated Bioeconomy Strategy, causing the European Commission to research the potential implications for global ecological boundaries of its increased demand for biofuels from Brazil. Brazil is the second largest exporter of biofuels and an important trade partner for the European Union. It is expected that the increased demand will have to be mitigated, mainly in greenhouse gas emissions and land use, of which the responsibility is placed mainly with the Brazilian environmental governance (Follador et al., 2019).
Background: the State of Mato Grosso
For the purpose the paper’s case study it is required to provide some background information about Mato Grosso. The state has a central location in Brazil, is the third largest state with an area of 90,335,700 ha and is for a large part covered by evergreen forests, where it derives its name from, meaning “great woods” (Simoes et al., 2020; The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, z.d. ). As indicated in figure 2c, the Northern part of the state consists of lowlands mainly covered by dense forests and grasslands, the southern highlands consist of extensive plains with scrub growth, the cerrado areas. Development and growth of the state have been slow due to the isolation of the state. The construction of a railroad in 1914 would start enabling regular communications and transport. In the second half of the 20th century, highways and air routes would significantly expand this further, reducing the state’s isolation and greatly improving its accessibility. The largest economic sector in Mato Grosso is the raising of livestock and agriculture, primarily located in the southern region of the state. Where the livestock provides cotton, the agricultural sector grows sugarcane, rice, corn and soybeans. 31,3% of Brazilian soybean production is produced in Mato Grosso as off 2009 (Arvor et al, 2012). It is in the second half of the 20th century that the large-scale agro-industry emerged in the area (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, z.d.).
Causal links of the Theoretical Framework
Figure 3: Theoretical Framework and causal links
The concepts of this theoretical framework are causally linked as shown in the figure above (Figure 3). Firstly, to introduce biofuels, its production and surrounding controversies are discussed. Hereafter, we elaborate on the overarching theory: the Treadmill of Production (ToP). Within this theory, expansion of biofuel production can be legitimized by narratives and discourses on a global level --often through the economic frame-- leading to several social and environmental implications (Gould, 2004). Land grabbing and land use change can be seen as manifestations of the Treadmill of Alternative Liquid Fuels (Clausen, 2005, Gould, 2004). The resulting social and environmental implications influence the ecosystem services and well-being of the local communities in Mato Grosso, and can enable environmental injustice. This framework forms the basis on which we build our analysis from developments and influence on multiple levels, from global to local.
Juxtaposition of biofuels and sustainability
Firstly it is of major importance to define the phenomenon of biofuels. Biofuels are seen as a renewable and alternative fuel option - other than petroleum - with the assumption that all energy required in the biofuels production process comes from biomass, including for instance corn, jatropha, palm oil, soybeans and sugarcane (Gurgel, 2007, Selfa, 2015). In Brazil the latter two are used for the production of biodiesel and bioethanol. ‘Biofuel’ refers to liquid fuel produced from organic material (Franco, 2010). As shortly mentioned in the introduction, the juxtaposition of biofuels and sustainability can be viewed as contested and even problematic, depending on one’s stance and interest. This acknowledgement is key when analysing the legitimizing discourses in a later stage of this paper.
Multiple studies state that biofuel production and its use can have both negative or positive impact on the environment and society, depending on several factors such as the production process itself, the geographic context and the policies that govern biofuel production and trade (Gasparatos, 2011). Proponents of biofuels underline the opportunity it gives for countries like Brazil to generate sustainable rural development in terms of employment and income. It may also help reduce emissions of carbon dioxide from automobiles, and reduce energy dependence on oil from for instance the Middle East (Sawyer, 2008). Biofuels have also been credited for bettering air quality in large cities in Brazil, with less cars utilizing older more polluting types of fuel (Goldemberg, 2008). This relates to the debate that biofuels would have a better environmental performance than conventional fossil fuels (Gasparatos, 2011). Gasparatos (2011) also states that many inquiries hold that biofuels emit less greenhouse gasses than fossil fuels during their whole life cycle.
However, according to many critics of pro-biofuel policies, the prefix ‘bio’ can mask the harmful social and environmental effects, and the term ‘agrofuel’ would be more suitable (Franco, 2010). McMichael (2009) emphasises that the ‘agrofuel-project’ as it has been coined, is essentially at odds with social and ecological sustainability in the long run. Thus, the biofuel project entails the making of a biofuel market with divergent motives such as dealing with contemporary concerns about the effects of fossil fuels. Scharlemann & Laurence (2008) mention the critique that the production of biofuels would consume vast swaths of agricultural land and native habitats resulting in rising food prices. Additionally, when forests are razed to provide more cropland, the reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions could be limited or even eliminated. Research also indicates that biofuel production still requires considerable use of fossil fuels via manufacturing, transportation and mechanization (Sawyer, 2008). This has led to criticism that advancing biofuels is part of a path-dependent process with mainly economic interests, and not necessarily helpful in sustainability efforts (Shikida, 2010). The divergent use of language within the scientific community concerning biofuels has become an obstacle to fruitful discussion (Gasparators, 2011). Thus, while keeping the controversy in mind, we will stick to the usage of ‘biofuels’ throughout this paper for the sake of consistency.
Treadmill of Alternative Liquid Fuels
When applied to biofuels, the Brazilian biofuel production can be viewed through the broad theory of
the treadmill of production (ToP), which analyses interactions between economic change and environmental change and critiques the focus on economic growth, as it would inevitably lead to increased levels of environmental degradation and pollution (Clausen, 2005, Gould, 2004). The treadmill is presented as an image of a society - including actors such as the state, private sector and organized labour - running in place without moving forward, due to the economic system’s urgency of expanding to keep profits high and deal with costs from technology and investments. The theory stresses the unappeasable and growing hunger for material goods, where physical, technical and organizational changes are viewed to be key of a global operation of the ToP (Fu, 2016). This includes ever increasing additions and withdrawals which have led to irreparable environmental and social destructions (Saidul, 2015).
Entities like the U.S., EU and Brazil have stated that their strategic goal is the creation of a global ethanol commodity market, which would involve such changes (Wilkinson, 2010). Following this argumentation, the ‘biofuel complex’ (which entails the addressing of the need for energy security) could be considered to be of ‘another’ production treadmill that is characterized by involvement of the state that contributes to the production process and benefiting interests of large capital investors like transnational corporations or large-scale plantation holders in the biofuel sector (Gasteyer, 2013). Maintaining the cycle of additions and withdrawals, through economic processes and promoting this biofuel project could be referred to as the Treadmill of Alternative Liquid fuels.
Land Grabbing and Land Use Change
Land grabbing as how this research defines it, is according to Borras and Franco (2012), who state land grabbing as involving the politics of changes in land use and property relations. Appropriation implies the transfer of ownership, use rights and control over resources - from the less powerful into the hands of more powerful actors, often including injustice. The injustice aspect relates to impacts on social and ecological aspects like adverse livelihood conditions for marginalized local small-scale farmers or indigenous communities who have to deal with the shaped land conflict (Hunsberger, 2017).
The theory of land grabbing interrelates strongly with the theorisation of environmental injustice, as well as with discursive structures. The latter follows, since the legitimization for the biofuel project could suggest a knowledge/power relation in the production of scarcity and development, as the biofuel market could have emerged from complex encounters between science, politics and technology (Fairhead, 2012). Also this could be related to the larger ideological discourse of neoliberalism, as this includes liberalisation of land and markets, encouraging ‘foreignisation’ (increasing international capital movements and international trade agreements) of land property and thereby transforming the agricultural sector (Borras, 2012). The former follows from the idea that land grabbing can be conceptualized as the appropriation of land and resources for specific provisioning ecosystem services which are deemed essential for ‘good life’, like food and fuel.
The land use change following the land grabbing is mainly driven by, as Labin, Geist and Lepers (2003) describe, synergetic factor combinations of a scarcity of resources which leads to an increase in pressure to produce further on those resources, the changing of opportunities created by the market, the loss of adaptive capacity, changes in attitudes and the social organisation, and outside the
intervention of policy. The result of the land use changes in ecosystem services and goods consequently feed back into the drivers that promote the land use change.
Narratives & Legitimizing Discourses
Evidently, conflicting discourses - like the neoliberal discourse - can be observed and related to concepts such as land grabbing and the treadmill of alternative liquid fuels, which Gould (2004), Fu (2016), and Borras (2012) also point out. Storytelling and narrative can also be powerful tools to either motivate and advance or obstruct a particular method (Janda and Topouzi, 2015; Sengers et al.,
2010). For example, Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting (CSR) is a practice that emerged in the 1970s, as corporations became more aware of and were held accountable for their impact on society and environment (Fifka, 2012). This practice, however, places the power of narrative with the corporations, who tend to use language that presents climate change as a business opportunity (Benites-Lazaro et al., 2017). Corporations are not the only entities that produce documentation with the inherent aim to influence the debate; governments, NGO’s and researchers have this power as well. The concept of “sustainable biofuels” is part of ideological contestation since the ability to control biofuel discourses - including what counts as ‘sustainable’ biofuel - is a central form of power that affects political and production decisions, thereby affecting the actors that are directly or indirectly involved (Hunsberger, 2014). Thus, the strategic use of language to justify and legitimize certain actions have a major influence on the direction of policy and governance, since it comprises the configuration of power-knowledge-truth frameworks (Boelens et al., 2014).
Ecosystem Services & Well-being
The biofuel-project underlines the conflicts over ecosystem service usage and its interrelation with the livelihood or quality of life of individuals within the biofuel debate. The link between these concepts can be seen in the ecosystem services model (figure 4). Several studies emphasise the fact that human communities depend on certain ecosystem services for their well-being and subsistence, and that this often clashes with economic incentives, like agricultural expansion (Clausen, 2008, Gasparatos, 2011). As Venghaus (2012) states, through changes in land-use and production systems, agricultural producers can provide a better mix of ecosystem services in order to meet society’s changing needs. However, since the agricultural landscape can also be viewed as an ecosystem, it should be noted that farmers can enhance and degrade ecosystems as being a natural resource manager. The paradox in the debate of biofuels is one in which it is a provisioning ecosystem service providing energy, thus secure resource access in terms of for instance electricity as can be derived from figure 4 as well. On the other hand the agricultural sector of biofuels also compromises other ecosystem services like food and freshwater services, which are fundamental to human well-being, revealing trade-offs are made in biofuel production when applying the concept of ecosystem services and its direct linkages with human well-being (Gasparatos, 2011).
Figure 4: Ecosystems services and human well-being framework (Gasparatos, 2011).
The prioritization in terms of how much a particular ecosystem service contributes to human well-being varies between communities to a certain extent as well. The cultural ecosystem services (figure 3) play a fundamental role in indigenous communities (Gasparatos, 20100). Venghaus (2012) also mentions that the consideration of the ecosystem services framework is necessary in order to incorporate for the threat of unjust and inequitable conditions that biofuel production brings forth, particularly in the Global South. It is important to realize that negative affections on ecosystem services today can be embedded in a complex system of global (economic, ecological as well as social) interdependencies which come to the foreground as well in theories of land grabbing, environmental injustice and ToP. Especially because the increasing demand for energy and material resources are causing a rise in ecological distribution conflicts (Conde,2017).
Environmental Injustice
Environmental injustice is an important concept when illustrating the political framework of environmental government. Environmental injustice is the sum of the environmental goods, such as the ecosystem services contributing to quality of life and the environmental bads, which include the potential damages and pollution to livelihoods and risks of degradation of life (Walker & Bulkeley, 2006). An unequal distribution of the environmental goods and bads over time, place and descent results in environmental injustice. According to Schlossberg (2004) environmental justice rests on the following three elements. First the geographical element, which consists of the geographical aspect of where injustices take place. Secondly, the procedural element of injustice is important to take into account while doing research on environmental justice. This factor is a political lens to look at procedures followed within certain situations, researching this should involve the participation of different stakeholders, their ability to participate and the process of including and excluding certain groups of people based on their origin, abilities or ideals. The last element consists of recognition of social injustices by the stakeholders. This last factor implies that social injustice has to be acknowledged in order to formulate or implement policies reducing these negative consequences. In Brazil environmental injustice often translates in an underrepresentation within the participation process of the interests of indigenous people, poor families or smallholder farmers due to limited resources and illiteracy (Richards & Van Wey, 2016). These people are often not used to a neoliberal system and bureaucratic measures. They live based on the environmental goods, which translates in that they live in and out of the rainforest with it being their provisioning, regulating and cultural ecosystem service, meaning these trees are their food, culture, pharmacist, spiritual space and their recreation (Burke, 2010; Richards & VanWey, 2016). As the land is needed for the increased demand of biofuel these indigenous people are often bought out for unreasonable prices, leaving them without their land and an unfair deal. These exploits of indigenous people and other people living in the rainforest are ought to be discouraged by the Brazilian constitution. However, large (agricultural) companies and the Brazilian government are somewhat inviolable and do not recognize the negative impacts of this market, as they promote biofuel increase as a sustainable energy providing agricultural product and its export as solely contributional to the Brazilian economy. Because these actions are poorly acknowledged by the powerful decision makers, the large biofuel producers are therefore not held responsible for deforestation practices at the cost of local communities (de Rocha et al., 2018).
As different stakeholders such as national and international NGOs continue to create global political awareness of this situation the political tension has increased. Therefore, it would be interesting to see how the different stakeholders present this situation and to which extent they acknowledge the environmental injustice. This is needed in order to create sustainable laws and policies for a sustainable agricultural production with limited environmental injustices (Schlossberg, 2004).
Research Problem & Sub-questions
The following problem is identified based on the Theoretical Framework above (figure 3). An increase in biofuel demand from the EU and other global forces, due to growing climate change concerns and therefore a renewable fuel option, leads to the growing import of biofuels from Brazil. Sugarcane and soybeans are required to produce these biofuels (Follador et al., 2019). In order to meet the growing demand for biofuels, Brazil is repurposing pastures and cutting down rainforests to dedicate more land to the growing of sugarcane and soybeans. This course of action can clash with the people living and working on this land, and relying on the provided ecosystem services (Gasparatos, 2011). The biofuel agricultural sector compromises ecosystem services, revealing trade-offs are made with other factors that determine the livelihood and human well-being. However, the European Union claims it is possible to expand their biofuel demand sustainably, enabled by adequate local governance by Brazil (Follador et al., 2019). The amount of actors with their own --often opposing-- interests involved, in addition to the range of scales (e.g. from global to local) in which this development takes place, renders it a complex issue. The main problem is that it can depend on a particular frame of a situation whether technological and social developments are seen as problematic or not: even within the classic realms of categorisation of impact (social, environmental and economic), controversies remain.
In order to examine this problem, the following research question has been formed: ‘How does the European demand for biofuels and the associated land use affect the well-being of local communities in the region of Mato Grosso?’ To answer this question, three sub questions have been formulated. The first question to be answered is ‘how are different stakeholders involved in the biofuel production process in Mato Grosso?’ This will be reviewed by means of a stakeholder analysis. Furthermore, the question ‘how is land-use change in Mato Grosso for the purpose of biofuel crops discursively legitimized?’ will be obtained by combining insights from the stakeholder analysis, narrative analysis and automated text analysis of policy documentation. Finally, the answer to the question ‘what are the social and environmental implications of the increased utilization and demand for biofuels and the associated land-use in Mato Grosso?’ will be answered by analyzing both the spatial-environmental implications and social implications.
Interdisciplinary Integration & Methods
Figure 5: Interdisciplinary integration and method
According to Menken and Keestra (2016), interdisciplinarity is a process of addressing a topic that is too complex to be dealt with adequately by a single discipline, and thus draws on several disciplinary perspectives and integrates their insights through construction of a more comprehensive perspective. The main question posed shows to be one of wicked complexity, as it demands knowledge and insights through the usage of multiple methodologies and analysis techniques from different disciplines. The production of alternative fuels can be seen as an expansion of the treadmill of production, which leads to further agricultural expansion, instead of a mitigation (McGee, 2017). This unexpected outcome is an indication of its complexity, which cannot be analyzed by a single discipline on its own. Another major concept is well-being of humankind, which is inevitably a multidimensional complex aspect of life in general. Catering to socially and environmentally inclusive well-being requires perspectives from all disciplines that have a view on how this can be achieved.
We aim to contribute to this problem definition with interdisciplinary research through insights drawn from the fields of Environmental Human Geography, Political Human Geography, Spatial Planning and Text Mining (Artificial Intelligence) as shown in figure 5. Literature research in Political Human Geography and Environmental Human Geography is combined to create a stakeholder analysis, determining which actors are relevant to our case. Results from Artificial Intelligence literature research will then be integrated with findings from Political Human Geography, creating a narrative analysis linked to the relevant actors. Next, these insights will be put into perspective using a multi-scalar analysis, performed using Spatial Planning and Environmental Human Geography. Lastly, findings regarding impact in the social sphere and the local environment, which together form the impact on livelihood in Mato Grosso, will be considered through the lens of the Treadmill of Alternative Liquid Fuels.
Stakeholder analysis
In order to draw conclusions on the formulated research question focused on the impact of biofuels on the well-being of the locals in Mato Grosso, a stakeholder analysis will be performed to determine how different stakeholders are involved in the biofuel production in Mato Grosso. This will elucidate how actors assert influence on the biofuel production, in multiple dimensions, such as ecological, political, legal and economic, aside from the main interests of the actors and their narratives on the situation (Hueartas et al., 2010). The first step in analysing the research question is to identify the different stakeholders and their narratives on the Brazilian biofuel production focused on the social and economic effects of this production on the local scale. This identification process is best described by a stakeholder analysis, as this analysis will show the different actors involved, their narratives on the situation and their influence to act within that situation (Hueartas et al., 2010). Stakeholders include all organizations, groups and individuals involved in the process of policy decision making (Brugha & Varvasovszky, 2000). The usage of literature study in examining stakeholder presence, and the application of the discussed integrated conceptual framework will prove vital, since the practice of land grabbing also comprises identifying discourses of power and legitimization (Borras, 2012). Prell et al. (2009) therefore state that the problem definition, or situation affected by the stakeholders is an important step of the analysing process. Secondly, the different direct actors within this situation in Mato Grosso will be identified based on official governmental policy documents, existing literature and non-official documents, as well as their narratives on the effect of this land grabbing on a local scale. Therefore limitations are that this research consists mainly of secondary data, and lacking primary data, as we are limited by spatial and temporal factors in obtaining these. Hence, awareness of how stakeholders portray themselves or how they are portrayed by other stakeholders is key in order to acquire objective results. The selection of direct stakeholders is made due to the limited time and resources and the focus of this research on the local scale with its communities. However, if the problem definition and scope of inquiry would be adjusted it would be interesting to do research and analyse other potential indirect actors as well such as end-users of biofuels in for instance Europe.
Lastly, this stakeholder analysis will be elaborating on the influence these actors have on the situation. To conclude all the findings will be summarized after which the findings will be combined with the narrative and multi scalar analysis in the following methodological steps.
Narrative analysis
To understand how the demand and whole biofuel project impacts socio-ecosystem services and thereby the livelihood of local communities, it is important to understand how the stakeholders that are involved discursively legitimize their actions, interests and objectives. This can be done through a narrative analysis. While narrative analysis can be performed in a myriad of ways, there is a common objective: recognizing the ‘story’ an actor is utilizing, to determine how a certain method, e.g. a new technology, is being presented (De Fina, 2017). Narrative analysis can be done qualitatively, quantitatively, or using a combination of both. The various methods of qualitative narrative analysis are based on the social sciences, such as politicology, sociology, and human geography.
A qualitative method applied by Janda and Topouzi (2015) that is relevant for the energy industry due to the role of technology is categorization of text in one of three stories: hero stories, learning stories and horror stories. In hero stories, new and efficient technology will ‘save’ society from climate
change. Learning stories aim to teach specific habits or life lessons, using specific characters and situations. Finally, horror stories are frightening and unwanted scenarios: the stories of failed technology. These latent patterns in text can be used to shape people’s perception (Benites-Lazaro et al., 2017). Therefore, this analysis can be useful for understanding how the issue is framed, and what the source is actually trying to convey.
Quantitative narrative analysis in the form of text mining has emerged over the last three decades and is now recognized to be a useful instrument in social sciences, with it being able to display trends, networks, and patterns in text (Franzosi, 2017). However, implications of quantitative results are always based on the interpretation of researchers. Their background, knowledge and possible ideology need to be taken into account (Benites-Lazaro et al., 2017).
The contribution of narrative analysis enables us to create a theoretical situation, namely how corporations, governmental and non-governmental entities present the predicted impact of biofuel production practices. This can then be put in perspective next to the practical reality that the multi-scalar analysis tries to conceive. Furthermore, the application of the broader theories of land grabbing and the treadmill of production are interesting to relate to the resulting narratives, as both provide a lens through which behavior of actors can be viewed. The narratives will be extracted from existing literature which use both qualitative and quantitative methods, and categorized using the three story theory by Janda and Topouzi (2015). As the narratives are inseparable to the actors, this analysis will be directly integrated into the stakeholder analysis.
Multi-scalar analysis
To be able to understand the social and environmental implications of biofuels in Mato Grosso, it is important to evaluate how the Amazon-Cerrado region and its ecosystem services which are vital for the well-being of humanity, are affected through processes involved in the act of land grabbing for the purpose of biofuel production and processing. While performing this analysis, the recurring scalar dimensions will be elaborated upon, as this way the ultimate causes instead of the proximate causes - the less obvious causes of implications propelled by the biofuel ‘solution’ - can be analyzed, and chains of explanation can be observed (Barret, 2013). Meaning how a cause or factor at one scale logically connects to a process at a different scale. The local-level dynamics can be situated in a broader web of national, global forces. Therefore the overarching theory of treadmill of production is of use, since it inherently entails delving into how a local process like biofuel production can be incorporated with a global operation within the global political economy, with actors like corporations, investors and the state, asserting influence - so also thinking across scales (as described in the causal link), and building upon the antecedent stakeholder analysis. Furthermore, in order to outline the (ongoing) land-use change, mapmaking and land-use maps from different sources, like scientific literature and land cover maps, will be appraised. Here we are also limited by the fact that this can only be researched through secondary sources, which will require a critical perspective from our side. The literature review on this subject matter will therefore consist of a large amount and variety of scientific articles, state documents among other sources that could provide insights about what reality is like in Mato Grosso, concerning the social and environmental implications of the ‘biofuel-boom’.
Results and Analysis
Stakeholder analysis & Narrative analysis
This paper solely focuses on the institutions and groups of stakeholders which influence the biofuel policy debate directly on the basis of investing in or lobbying and framing the narratives on the situation of Mato Grosso, together with the local communities and small holding farmers. The direct stakeholders include the governments, the researchers, non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) and biofuel investors and producers as shown in figure 6. Additionally, this stakeholder analysis includes the narrative of the local people and smallholder farmers.
Figure 6: Stakeholder supply chain of biofuels (Schillo et al., 2017)
Stakeholder identification & stakeholder narrative
The stakeholders who directly influence the policy of land grabbing will be incorporated within this research, as well as the local communities and small farmers. The direct actors and local stakeholders are identified as the governments, researchers, NGOs, investors, producers and the local communities. Narratives on the effects biofuel production land grabbing has on the local scale could be shared by some stakeholders, such as the large biofuel producers and the investors (Talamani & Dewes, 2012; Schillo et al., 2017).
Governments
Within this research two main governmental institutions are analysed. First the narratives of the European Union governmental framework (EU) as the biggest importer of biofuel, and secondly the Brazilian Government, whose narrative is broader than the local communities alone and has to cope with the full Brazilian economy and employment opportunities (Milhorence, 2020; Talamani & Dewes, 2012).
The first narrative is the narrative of the EU. The EU has labeled biofuel since 2000 as a green form of energy (Stattman, 2019). Since then, the European import of biofuel from Brazil has been increasing greatly. This initial focus on biofuel was important to the EU due to the emission reduction aspirations the EU formulated. However, since the debate concerning the sustainability of biofuel arised, so did the European framing of biofuel in accordance with their subsidies (De Almeida et al., 2007). In Europe’s latest report on the bioeconomy the EU stresses the benefits of developments and potential biofuel increases within the Amazon, mainly because of the relative small improvements in agricultural businesses, infrastructural projects and the potential possibilities an increased biofuel production could have on work opportunities (Bell et al., 2019; De Almeida et al., 2007). This narrative focuses solely on the possibilities and the possibilities towards a sustainable biofuel production in Brazil, and over jumps the negative social and humanitarian consequences. This could therefore be considered a hero story, presenting biofuels technology as the saviour.
The second narrative of the Brazilian government is about the nature commodification and land privatisation. This narrative is widely believed by the economic export-oriented companies and international institutions. The Brazilian government has the past few decades been proving to govern in a manner to increase agribusiness developments and agricultural production (Milhorence, 2020). This aim includes the focus for the Brazilian economy to strive and to benefit from these agricultural export commodities, which, in some cases, has led to neglecting human rights and ecological problems (Ioris et al., 2019). As Brazil has resources in abundance, it is able to generate an intensified amount of export commodities; they are able to produce the second largest export trade-flow of agricultural goods of the world. According to this narrative, this participation in the world economy is one of the most important policy aims of Brazil. Again, biofuel technology is presented as overwhelmingly positive for the people of Brazil and this narrative, too, is a hero story.
Researchers
Scientific literature has been fueling the debate between on the one hand the Brazilian economy supported commodification of the Amazon and on the other hand the neglected human rights and destruction of habitat (Talamani & Dewes, 2012). The most influential institution is the Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). This institution has published about the REDD+ paper, a large study focused on the reduction of emissions by deforestation and carbon storages within the Amazon (May et al., 2016; Nepstad et al., 2018). Their aim is to inform policy makers and other politicized organisations to govern the Amazon in a sustainable manner. This paper, in accordance with other literature, has been showing the effects of biofuel production on the local scale. 75% of the land in Mato Grosso is owned by large landowners, who have a great incentive to clear its land for agricultural purposes and economic benefits (Richards & Van Wey, 2016). This focus on agricultural export oriented products has been the most important driver for the local economic development of Mato Grosso (Richards et al., 2015). These large landowners in accordance with the Brazilian government have consequently viewed and handled the Amazon and its land as a manner to increase agricultural export and economic growth. However, this vision and benefits have come with a cost to the smaller land-owners and indigenous people. Their imaginative human-nature relationship is based on balance and co-existence within ecosystem services, such as the Amazon. Not only their personal lives and world is endangered by the national and international demand for increasing agricultural commodities, as well as the balance of the tropical rainforest and its ability to regenerate itself
(DeFries et al., 2013: Ioris et al., 2019). In a comparative study of government documents and scientific literature performed by Talamini and Dewes (2012), it is shown that Brazilian researchers focus more on environmental dimensions than the government. It could be argued that the narrative by researchers is a horror story, with the aim to warn people about the negative impact of biofuel production on the environment.
NGOs
NGOs have diverse narratives on biofuel and the habitat of local communities according to their ideals and discourses. One important aspect of the NGO is at what scale they operate. Therefore, this category is divided by international NGOs and national NGOs.
On an international scale the World Wide Fund (WWF) has been the leading NGO to focus on the biodiversity loss within Mato Grosso and the rest of Brazil (Dauverge & Neville, 2009). Whilst their aim is to decrease biodiversity loss, they have been supported by Cargill, which is the largest agricultural producer in Brazil (Baletti, 2011). The WWF narrative aims for a sustainable agricultural production and limited deforestation with minimal impacts on the local scale, which could coexist according to their beliefs. Due to the positive attitude towards biofuels, the narrative is considered a
hero story.
Another international NGO invested in Mato Grosso is Greenpeace. Greenpeace has continuously been publishing articles and campaigns against Cargill’s practices and the policies of the Brazilian government within the Brazilian Amazon and Mato Grosso (Junior & Lima, 2018). They have also been telling the story of André Karipunu, who is a man from one of the indigenous people living in Mato Grosso and is advocating for its rights at the United Nations (UN) against the large agricultural producers and the government (Greenpeace, 2019 April; Greenpeace, 2019 June). This narrative stresses the negative humanitarian consequences of biofuel production on the local scale.
Oxfam International have been advocating against the policies of the Brazilian government, with a focus on the human rights of the indigenous people and the technical costs-benefits considerations that might not take into account inherent social factors (Wilkinson & Herrera, 2010). They present data to counter-argue the government's explanations and aspirations. If the Brazilian government avoids and ignores the social implication of their biofuel expansion aims, Oxfam International is there to point them out and emphasizes the Government's statements on research, information and grounds neglecting the human rights. The narratives of these NGOs can be categorized as a combination of a
horror story, in that negative impact of biofuel production is emphasized, and a learning story, identifying a ‘character’ that is trying to mitigate the situation.
The most influential NGO on the national scale is The Comissão Pastoral da Terra (CPT), they support the local communities in subjects such as human rights and social justice (Oliveira & Hecht, 2016). Their narrative tries to unite the indigenous people as their habitats are often very remote, and they are estimated to have a relatively high rate of illiteracy. This narrative corresponds with the narrative of the indigenous people and the small-holder farmers as the main focus of CPT is to represent their interests. This narrative appreciates quality of life and human well-being above the economic benefits land could provide (Ioris et al., 2019). It is based on a co-existence of humans and the forest. As the
Amazon has been increasingly put under stress, this narrative promotes legal and practical policies to conserve the remaining forests. It focuses on forest regeneration and aims for more protection of those who have lived in the forest for generations, such as the indigenous tribes. In order to achieve this, CPT advocates adjustments to be made in in the Brazilian Constitution. This narrative proclaims the natural rainforest and humans to be co-existent and important for one another. It can be classified as a
learning story, as the actors try to create a specific atmosphere to encourage cooperation.
Investors and producers
Another stakeholder group consists of the large investors as well as the large biofuel producers. The largest producers are called the ABCD-group (ADM, Bunge, Cargill and Dreyfus). Their main focus is the increased biofuel production and economic progress through profits and capital accumulation. These producers invoke their claim to the forest, given to them by the Brazilian Government. They frame the local situation as healthy and beneficial for local farmers, employment and social developments. According to Cargill, the remote areas and indigenous people are able to flourish and participate in the Brazilian economy after its arrival (Cargill, 2019). As the global focus on the sustainability of biofuel increases, the ABCD group has justified their actions with quotas and restrictions within biofuel production. These policies have led them to present their actions as sustainable for indigenous people by offering them money or job opportunities. Furthermore, their involvement is presented as beneficial for the environment by investing large amounts of money in environmental developments such as genetic modification, forest conservation techniques and agricultural developments. All claims considered, this would be positive for the economy on the local and national scale (Junior & Lima, 2018; Oliveira & Hecht, 2016; Sauer & Leite, 2011). This narrative is a hero story, as seen in the narratives of the EU and the Brazilian government.
Local communities
As this research is focussed on the implications on the local scale, it is important to research the narratives present at this scale. The first important stakeholder group is the group of the indigenous peoples living in Mato Grosso. The state of Mato Grosso houses the second largest population of indigenous people in Brazil (Povos Indígenas Brasil, 2014). This population includes the peoples of Terena, Kaiowa and Xingu, who are often entailed in the media or reports on the situation of the indigenous (Instituto Socioambiental, 2019a; Povos Indigenas Brasil, 2014). The official state representation for indigenous people is formed by the National Foundation of the Indian (FUNAI). However, this organ is said to have no actual power within the Brazilian government, being slowly dismanteled by the administration over the past five years (Carneiro da Cunha et al., 2017) . Another criticism of this entity is that it is an indirect delegation, and less able to represent the diversity of the multitude of indigenous groups (Rocha, 2013). In contrast, the Articulation of Indigenous People of Brazil (APIB) consists of direct self-representation by indigenous groups. This organisation calls attention to the infringements of human rights and the threat of deforestation to their livelihood. They utilize the horror story, drawing attention to the negative aspects of biofuel production.
The second stakeholder group that can be considered part of the local community of Mato Grosso are the smallholder farmers. Often, big agricultural investors such as the ABCD group work together with the smaller farmers on the local scale. These farmers are offered jobs on the new site in return for their land (Cargill, 2019). This offer contributes to economic stability of small family farmers, who often align with one another (World Bank, 2019). These farmers are likely to follow the narrative of the hero story as told by the investor stakeholder group, as biofuel production has increased their quality of life. However, some smallholder farmers do not want to align with other smallholder farmers or large producers, or are not ‘adopted’ by an investment program due to the random nature in which participating farms are selected (German et al., 2010). As they represent a relatively small number of the total agricultural sector, these farmers feel like they are out competed due to their limited economic resources and their unfamiliarity with land exploitation techniques. Additionally, a long-lasting dispute between smallholder farmers and indigenous people about ancestral land rights still cause conflicts that cannot be easily solved (UN, 2015). The narrative of theses smallholder farmers are unclear, as they fall through the cracks in multiple ways.
Stakeholder subconclusion
The differentiation in the narratives has been made between the export oriented stakeholders, whom are more focused on the positive economic effects, and the forest conservation minded stakeholders, who are more focused on preserving the living environment. Within the local communities, both the indigenous people and smallholder farmers can be seen as the stakeholder group that are negatively affected most (figure 7).
The Brazilian and European governments have been proven to think export oriented. Their narratives are based on subsidies and agreements to increase biofuel production within Mato Grosso, and they present biofuel technology as predominantly positive . On the other hand, the different NGOs called for limitation of agricultural production in order to preserve the forest as a ecosystem. However, these NGOs do have a different emphasis on who or what is affected within Mato Grosso. WWF and Greenpeace focus on the biodiversity loss of the situation, and Oxfam International and CPT mainly focus on the humanitarian implications. The view that limitation of agriculture is necessary is shared by the largest Amazonian research investigated by the CIFOR. However, their focus is solely on the effects of land degradation.
As it is already briefly addressed it is clear that some stakeholders seem to have conflicting interests. The WWF confirms the sustainability of Cargill’s newest project, while being financially supported by Cargill. Independence and objectivity of the analysis can therefore be questioned. It is important to note that a distinction between the stakeholders is not completely comprehensive, due to these conflicting and overlapping interests. However, it is a useful tool to describe the initial narratives of institutions and organizations, even when their actions might differ from them (figure 7). This conflict is also reflected in the fact that the narrative of forest conservation minded stakeholders largely overlap with the actors using learning stories and horror stories to influence the debate on biofuel production, with the exception of the WWF, which utilizes a hero story narrative.
Figure 7: distinction between stakeholder narratives
A multi-scalar approach
To understand the social and environmental implications caused by the ‘biofuel-complex’ - that are intertwined with livelihood and human well-being - imperative is inquiry into the local situation of Mato Grosso and its interrelations to processes and factors on multiple scales. The stakeholder analysis has further substantiated the reality that a single scale analysis runs contrary to the subject of biofuels due to the numerous actors across scales. Geographical scales should be understood in the sense that they are non-demarcated areas, and a continuum that should be formed and analyzed through the context of real-world practices (Barret, 2013). So the scalar dimensions of environmental unjust practices that are described in the theories of land grabbing and the ToP are the core of this analysis which will be reflected through the local situation of Mato Grosso. Firstly it is necessary to investigate how the identified stakeholders, aspects and constituent concepts of land grabbing and treadmill of production operate and take place over multiple higher scales. Which afterwards can be related to the actual land-use and spatial characteristics of Mato Grosso in order to comprehend the local situation and impact of the ‘treadmill of alternative liquid fuels’. This also entails reflecting on how the ecosystem-services and thereby the livelihood and well-being is affected.
Global significance
In order to decipher the global dimensions of the production and demand of biofuels and its social and environmental implications, a ToP perspective proves useful, mainly due to its focus on the global nature of today’s production processes, as basically every producing country is incorporated within the capitalist world economy (Gould, 2004). Especially in developing countries and emerging countries (like Brazil) environmental degradation occurs as a direct result of production demand from more further developed countries (like those in the EU), since it is acknowledged that Brazil is EU’s second trading partner overall (Follador et al., 2019). Furthermore Banse (2011) states that since the EU is not able to domestically produce sufficient biofuel crops to fulfil its Biofuel Directive (BFD), the entity imports biofuels from countries like Brazil. Also a global trend can be observed in which towards the end of the 20th century and to this day, an increasing growth of withdrawal of natural assets in Latin America and other less developed regions arises, referred to as the ‘commodities consensus’, which originates from earlier neoliberal policies like the Washington Consensus (Svampa, 2013).
ToP mentions how with the interaction of the state, capital and the environment, provisioning ecosystem services are converted into profits via transnational organization of production and market exchange, plus the ongoing expansion and intensification of production processes (Saidul, 2015). Similar to the stakeholder analysis, focus within ToP is not on indirect stakeholders which are geographically distant from the production process, like end-users of biofuels (consumers), but rather the producers and investors, or private sector (Gould, 2004). Thus in ToP, likewise as with the theory of land grabbing, transnational corporations (TNCs) like the ABCD-group - whom possess the power and capital to fuel intensification and expansion of agricultural practices - play a large role which is also the case in Mato Grosso (Sauer, 2011).
Several studies have shown correlation between the areas of agribusiness expansion and areas targeted by foreign investments, emphasizing the global nature of the biofuel and overall agricultural market. Although in 2004 the total foreign ownership of land in Brazil has been calculated at around only 4 million hectares, yet the amount of land under joint ownership is estimated at a much larger amount - this is far more difficult to calculate. Mato Grosso is one of the sugarcane producing states in the Cerrado region in which foreign ownership is unevenly distributed and highly concentrated (Oliveira, 2013).
National significance
As mentioned before, within the agro-energy sector, Brazil is one of the most important international players after the United States, with approximately 17.5 billion litres of ethanol, mainly due to its lower production costs (Amatucci, 2010). ToP mentions how the state is of major significance in setting the rules and structures through which investors, corporations (producers), ngos etc. pursue their interest (Saidul, 2015). Evidently the global aspects of the biofuel market, such as ‘foreignization’ and foreign demand, relate undeniably to national level practices and processes. A large variety of sources uncover how the national Brazilian government is openly engaged in distinguishing itself within the global energy arena and endeavors to attract investments in the
agro-business (Freire, 2015). McGee (2017) and Gould (2004) discuss how the state is dependent on these investments and capital in order to employ workers, and continue extracting natural resources for production of commodities and further development of the country - in the case of Mato Grosso and Brazil a focus on crops for biofuels. This explains the hesitant and conservative environmental regulations of the Brazilian government, as these could reduce and threaten the expansion of jobs and trade. This can be confirmed through studies done by for instance McKay (2016), that describe the role of the Brazilian state in creating favorable conditions for a non-food market by among other things regulating consumer prices for fuel, control of distribution infrastructure and conditions of land conversion.
So both foreign as well as domestic capitalist interests, as can be derived from the stakeholder analysis, facilitate the strengthening of the agribusiness production system and the national progress ideology that sustains it. State-making efforts through the Terra Legal programme (TL) initiated on a national scale by the Ministry of Rural Development, result into greater legibility and regularization of land in Mato Grosso and other parts of the Cerrado, which causes agribusiness to intensify production and deforestation in already more deforested areas of the Amazon-Cerrado transition zones in order to protect less deforested areas (Oliveira, 2013). Also the rural agricultural lobby in the Federal Assembly has pressed for a relaxing of measures of protecting dense forested areas and thereby pressuring small holders of lands and indigenous lands (Wilkinson, 2010). This relates to how state-making processes have yet to open the policy-making process to disenfranchised groups such as indigenous communities and how land grabbing eventualizes across scales (Carvalho, 2000).
Local significance of Mato Grosso
The discussed aspects of land grabbing and ToP and the associated crossing of (higher) scalar boundaries of the demand and production of biofuels accommodate better insights into the local situation of Mato Grosso and help to map the actual social, spatial and environmental implications.
Land Use Change
Figure 8: Land Cover Maps of Mato Grosso in 2001 and 2014 respectively (Kastens et al., 2017)
As can be seen on the land cover maps of 2001 and 2014 in figure 8, there is a division to be observed between the North and the South of Mato Grosso. The south of Mato Grosso is a more accessible cerrado area due to the lack of forests and the more prominent presence of infrastructure in the form of main roads as can be seen in figure 9. In the North however is an area with a land cover consisting mainly of forests, but when comparing the images from 2001 and 2014, it becomes apparent that there has been an expansion in agricultural land. Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE) estimates that around 14.5 million ha of forests in the forested areas of Mato Grosso have been cut down between 1988 and 2018, which is just over 16% of the total Mato Grosso land area. The INPE also estimates that 4.5 million ha of the natural cerrado vegetation have been removed between 2001 and 2018, being 5% of total Mato Grosso land area (Simoes et al., 2020). Arvor et al (2012) also notes that in the cropping years they surveyed, 2000-2001 through 2006-2007, their results show an expansion in the agricultural sector of 43% in the net area cropped. Until the early 2000’s most of the expansion occurred in the Cerrado ecoregion, by the time the article by Arvor et al (2012) was written the agricultural expansion had moved to the forest ecoregion, which accounts for 65% of the crop expansion in Mato Grosso from the year 2000 to 2006. Thus large swathes of forest have been removed and replaced by cropland. In July 2006 a Soy Moratorium was enacted by the Brazilian government to halt deforestation for the purpose of soy production in the Brazilian Amazon. The
deforestation rate after the enactment of the aforementioned moratorium dropped to one fifth of the deforestation rate before the moratorium was enacted, while the conversion rate of forest to soy dropped by half (Kastens et al, 2017). During the study period of fourteen years there was also a soy production shift found where single-crop systems gave way to double-crop systems, increasing soy production intensity. This rapid intensification could lead to the pollution of headwaters of the rivers which cross the area such as the Xingu River, which is discussed further in Mato Grosso and
Well-being (Arvor et al, 2010).
Figure 9: Main Road Infrastructure in Mato Grosso (d-maps, 2020)
Mato Grosso and Well-being
This part of the analysis will show how the prioritization of certain ecosystem services - which are constituent for human well-being- over others, has positive, but predominantly negative social and environmental consequences. The ToP (as depicted in figure 10) clarifies that the need for higher productivity - leading to agricultural expansion and intensification of available land in Mato Grosso due to limiting expansion policies related to ILPAs (Indigenous Lands and Protected Areas) - causes more additions to the environment (Sawyer, 2008). This threatens the multitude of services the ecosystem of the Amazon and Cerrado provides for local communities, including the indigenous people of the Xingu Indigenous Park which finds its contemporary boundaries next to the agricultural frontier (Schwartzman, 2013). Therefore this part also feeds back to the part of the stakeholder analysis in which the local communities are outlined.
Figure 10: ToP schematization of impact on nature and thereby on ecosystem services and the interrelated well-being and livelihood of people (derived from ToP literature, such as Gould (2004) and Saidul (2015)).
It is however clear that the production and withdrawal of biofuels also provides room for rural development in economic and social terms, such as rural employment and rural income creation, however the magnitude of its positive or negative impact of biofuel production depends greatly on the type and scale of the biofuel production system (Gasparatos, 2011). Although shifting elds to fuel production may also raise food prices, with consequences for the poor, who pay for more expensive farm goods as they lose lands for subsistence agriculture (Walker, 2011). Another counter argument often made is the fact that per 170-200 hectares of soybeans or other crops, only 1 worker is employed. Only for the clearing of land or harvesting - so on a temporary basis - a larger amount of indirect jobs is created according to Bunge (large scale producer and part of the ABCD-group), often under bad and sometimes inhumane labour circumstances (Bickel, 2003, Wilkinson, 2010). This is also due to further mechanization, requiring less labour input, thus accelerating the accumulation of capital as described in ToP literature (Gould, 2004).
Certain governmental incentives to encourage local smallholder biofuel production appear to be overpowered by counter-incentives favoring larger scale production systems that are connected to markets beyond the national level. The attempt to raise local livelihoods and to reduce poverty among smallholders has so far failed and depends severely on the scale and location of production and consumption (Hunsberger, 2014, Van der Horst, 2011). For instance the biofuel crops and the biofuel itself is most often not consumed in the localities, therefore not answering the need for provisioning ecosystem services. Smallholder subsistence farming is being replaced and thereby increasing the dependency of these local people on a way of life that provides a meager income and forces them into worsened precarious circumstances, concerning for instance food security. This even forces locals to find a way out of agriculture into other non-farm sectors or migrate elsewhere, to for instance the urban sector (White, 2010, Langlois, 2020). All in all, Van der Horst (2011) claims that the switch to cash and biofuel crops does not create a net gain for rural and local indigenous peoples since it captures only a limited aspect of an individual’s livelihood. The infringements on well-being due to beneficial changes for agribusiness in land ownership, land management and land use, counter the gains made in terms of financial transactions for these peoples (Ioris, 2016). This overview of the
