Biofuel, land-use tradeoffs and livelihoods in Southern Africa

Abstract

The rapid expansion of biofuel projects in southern Africa creates an opportune issue against which to examine land-use tradeoffs within the areas of customary land tenure. For this an ecosystems services approach is used. Jatropha curcas (L), a perennial oilseed plant which has been the key focus of most of the region’s biofuel expansion to date is used as the focus biofuel crop for which case study data were obtained from Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia and South Africa. Despite the initial enthusiasm for jatropha, most projects have proven less successful than hoped, and many have collapsed. A few are, however, still showing signs of possible success and it is two of these that form the basis of the case studies. Hugely complex tradeoffs are involved when considering biofuel as a land-use option for communal areas. They range from global impacts such as biodiversity and global climate forcing, through national concerns of rural development, national food security and national fuel security, to local household concerns around improving livelihoods. Land that is converted to biofuel needs to be removed from some previous use, and in the southern African case it is typically woodlands and the multitude of services they provide, that suffer. The nature of the tradeoffs and the people affected change over the scale under consideration. For the local farmer it is only the local issues that are of concern, but national and global forces will change the policy environment and lead to new types of development such as biofuels. Change is inevitable, and in all developments there are likely to be both winners and losers. It is clear that the impacts arising from biofuel are situation dependent, and each community and location has unique social and environmental considerations that need to be taken into account. In the case of jatropha the final realised yield and the economic returns that this can generate, will be of critical importance and remain one of the main uncertainties. There are promising signs that under certain circumstances the balance of benefits from jatropha biofuel may be positive, but if implemented incorrectly or in the wrong place, there is extensive evidence of total project failure. It is clear that evidence-based data and assessment tools are needed to assist communities, developers and government departments to make sound decisions around biofuel (or other land-use based) development. A number of such tools are suggested in the thesis. Both the use of large-scale plantations or small-scale farmer centred projects have their advantages and disadvantages. It is probable that in the correct circumstances either can work. However, large-scale plantations can have huge negative social and environmental consequences if poorly implemented. Small-scale projects, though improving livelihoods, are unlikely to take the farmers out of poverty. Tradeoffs from any land-use change are inevitable. Empirical data on biofuel impacts on the environment and society are needed for the development of sound policy. A favourable policy environment can ensure that positive benefits from biofuel are obtained, whilst minimising negative impacts. To develop this policy means that southern African countries will have to clearly understand what they wish to achieve from biofuel, as well as having a clear understanding of impacts from biofuel implementation. Sound scientific knowledge needs to underpin this process. For instance governments may wish to increase the ratio of small-scale to large-scale plantation to increase the developmental benefits, ensure biofuel is used to promote national fuel security rather than being exported, or develop a medium-scale farming sector which can help move farmers out of poverty and assist in developing a market surplus of agricultural commodities. Analysing impacts from biofuel expansion is a complex and multi-dimensional problem and as such will require multi-criteria analysis tools to develop solutions. Global, national and local tradeoffs must all be considered. In addition a wide range of stakeholders are involved and participatory processes may be needed to capture their inputs. Tools to better analyse impacts, specifically at the local level are needed. These local results need to feed into national level economic assessments. The cost of biofuel introduction should be considered against the costs of not implementing biofuel, realising that doing nothing also has a cost and long-term impact. Third-party certification provides a useful tool for shifting costs of ensuring compliance with social and environmental legislation, from the state to biofuel companies. In addition ongoing monitoring and evaluation of existing projects is needed to learn from successes and failures, to identify unintended consequences, and to increase the resilience of projects, community livelihoods and the national economy. This will have to be supplemented with additional focused and ongoing research