Seminar paper from the year 2012 in the subject Ethnology / Cultural Anthropology, grade: 1, University of Luzern (ethnologisches Seminar), course: Land Grabbing, language: English, abstract: The global biofuel production has been rapidly increasing since 2007-08 and with it the new demand for land, which has a strong focus on Africa as it has weak land rights protection. Most foreign investors, who intend to buy land for the biofuel production take advantage of the lack of proper property rights in several African countries. Therefore, many of the rural poor, who depend on land for their living, suffer from expulsion or dispossession. In summary, it can be said that the formalization of land titles only serves the poor, when secondary rights as for example for women, herders or migrants, are respected by the state or the foreign investors when allocating, buying or leasing land. In addition, during the processes of allocating, buying or leasing land, the state as well as the foreign investor should give whole local communities (not only local elites) the possibility to negotiate over the future use of the land they tilled for years. From the four land tenure reforms outlined, where land based wealth and power transfers occurs, the two best possible solutions, which serve the poor, would be the redistribution and the distribution of land. In my opinion, the preferable one of this two solutions is distribution as this solution is less conflict-prone. In the present paper two case studies are used to show how (as in the case of Ghana) local elites or foreign investors make decisions without consulting local communities or, that simply changing laws or introduce policies is not enough to protect the land rights of the affected local communities (as in the case of Mozambique). Even if local communities are compensated for loss of their land rights, many agreements between communities and investors emphasize one-off compensations rather than long-term benefit sharing, such as job creation or leasing incomes and the agreements usually involve very small payments compared to for example the value of the forest concessions acquired by investors.

Contributes to the global debate on biofuels, in particular the consequences that large-scale production of transport fuel substitutes can have on rural areas, principally in developing countries and in some poor rural areas of developed countries. This book looks at the production of biofuels from the role of biofuels in reducing rural poverty.

Biofuels and Rural Poverty makes an original contribution to the current controversial global debate on biofuels, in particular the consequences that large-scale production of transport fuel substitutes can have on rural areas, principally in developing countries but also in some poor rural areas of developed countries. Three key concerns are examined from a North-South perspective: ecological issues (related to land use and biodiversity), pro-poor policies (related to food and land security, gender and income generation) and equity of benefits within the global value chain. Can biofuels be pro-poor? Can smallholder farmers be equitably integrated in the biofuels global supply chain? Is the biofuels production chain detrimental to biodiversity? Most other books available on biofuels take a technical approach and are aimed at addressing energy security or climate change issues. This title focuses on the socio-economic impacts on rural people's livelihoods, offering a unique perspective on the potential role of biofuels in reducing rural poverty.

The last five to ten years have seen a strong resurgence of interest in bioenergy along with the gradual development of more modern and efficient bioenergy production systems. This has been driven by several factors including instability in oil producing regions, financial market shift of investments in 2007-2008 to commodities and oil, extreme weather events, and surging energy demand from developing countries. Bioenergy developments present both opportunities and challenges for socioeconomic development and the environment and have a number of potential impacts on forests and the rural poor who depend on forests for their livelihoods. In developing countries, the impact of bioenergy on poverty alleviation will depend on the opportunities that are presented for agricultural development, including income and employment generation and the potential to increase poor peoples' access to improved types of bioenergy. There are significant concerns surrounding the efficiency of different bioenergy options to combat climate change, the impact on agriculture, food security and sustainable forest management and the social impacts of bioenergy development, particularly related to land use changes, land tenure, and land rights. Food insecurity may result if staple crops are used for energy production or land conflicts and if production displaces local communities or restricts access to land. The environmental impacts of these developments are uncertain and will vary considerably from case to case. The development of bioenergy is likely to have significant impacts on the forest sector directly, through the use of wood for energy production, and indirectly, as a result of land use changes. It is expected that energy production from solid biomass will have both direct and indirect impacts on the sector, whereas liquid biofuels will mainly have indirect effects.

Interest in biofuels began with oil shocks in the 1970’s, but the more rapid development and consumption of biofuel industry in recent years has been primarily driven by mandates, subsidies, climate change concerns, emissions targets and energy security. From 2004 to 2006, fuel ethanol grew by 26% and biodiesel grew by 172%. As biofuel production continues to expand, investments in capacity expansion and research and development have been made. The 2008 food crisis emphasized the need to re-examine biofuel consequences. Biofuels remain an important renewable energy resource to substitute for fossil fuels, particularly in the transportation sector, yet biofuels’ success is still uncertain. The future of biofuels in the energy supply mix relies on mitigating potential and improving the environmental gains. This book brings together leading authorities on biofuel from the World Bank to examine all of the impacts of biofuel (economic, social, environmental) within a unified framework and in a global perspective, making it of interest to academics in agricultural and environmental economics as well as industry and policy-makers.

Environmental, Economic and Policy Aspects of Biofuels provides a timely summary of the current issues contributing to the policy debates on this emerging and important topic. The authors make several key conclusions: - Biofuels are diverse and evolving. The next generation of biofuels has the potential to provide improved net benefits but requires significant technological breakthroughs. - Greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits vary significantly across various types of biofuels and are dependent on market conditions and policy situation. - While biofuel improves the welfare of gasoline consumers and food producers, it has a significant negative affect on food consumers, especially the poor. - A diverse set of policies, which have been introduced or proposed, impact biofuels directly including subsidies, mandates, and regulation of carbon content of fuels. However, current policies do not provide incentives that align private and social welfare. - Much of the impact assessments of biofuels thus far are ex-ante estimates based on either optimization or equilibrium models. There is a lack of ex-post econometric analysis of the marginal impact of biofuels and biofuel policies on the economy. And the structural relationships between agriculture, the energy sector, and the environment in the context of biofuels have hardly been studied. The biofuel policy debate is likely to be an ongoing one in the near future and Environmental, Economic and Policy Aspects of Biofuels should be required reading for anyone interested in understanding this diverse and growing literature.