(Bio)Fueling Injustice? - Europafrica

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EuropAfrica – Towards Food Sovereignty is a campaign that connects African farmers’ platforms and European civil society organizations to reflect and act together on major current issues concerning food and agricultural policies, trade and development cooperation. EuropAfrica aims to raise awareness and advocate on shared issues and to promote sustainable small-scale family farming and local agrifood systems that bring consumers and producers closer together. The campaign supports the attainment of food sovereignty, i.e. the right for people and communities to define their own food and agricultural policies, both in Africa and in Europe, without impeding the food sovereignty of others. EuropAfrica Partners in Europe Terra Nuova (Campaign Coordinator) Vredeseilanden www.terranuova.org www.vredeseilanden.be Centro Internazionale Crocevia (CIC) Practical Action www.croceviaterra.it www.practicalaction.org Collectif Stratégies Alimentaires (CSA) Glopolis www.csa-be.org www.glopolis.org EuropAfrica Partners in Africa ROPPA - Network of Peasant organizations and Producers in West Africa www.roppa.info EAFF - Eastern African Farmers Federation www.eaffu.org PROPAC – Regional Platform of Farmers Organizations in Central Africa Author of the Report Sylvain Aubry, with the support of Philip Seufert and Sofía Monsalve Suárez, for FIAN - FoodFirst Information and Action Network. Contributions from CNCR – Conseil National de Concertation et de Coopération des Ruraux/ROPPA and EAFF. Info Terra Nuova Centro per il Volontariato Onlus Via Gran Bretagna 18 – 00196 Roma (Italy) Tel. +39 06 8070847 www.europafrica.info This report is part of the project “Awareness raising on the on the relations between European policies and agricultural development in Africa”, co-funded by the European Commission | DCI - NSAED/2010/240-529 2
Executive summary Adding value to the reflection on land grabbing and biofuels The present report builds on the findings presented in the 2009-2010 EuropAfrica study on land-grabbing prepared by FIAN International (the “Monitoring” report ”) 1 and on documentation of new cases and relevant reports on issues of commercial investments in land in Africa and the role of biofuels released since. It focuses on the impacts of the EU biofuel policy regarding food security, sustainable small-scale agricultural production and other related social, economic and environmental aspects, with special attention to Africa. It concludes that, as it stands, this policy is not coherent with EU development objectives and that, in applying it, the EU and its Member States are violating human rights standards. This contradiction, however, can be corrected. The report is framed in the spirit of the shared aim that no harm and suffering should result from EU policies. It seeks to constructively suggest ways to improve the existing policies and to create a space for dialogue between EU actors, civil society and affected people to this effect. Land grabbing: a growing phenomenon Based on the latest scientific research, the term “land grabbing” is used to refer to the phenomenon of concentration of land and associated natural resources, particularly water, due to domestic or foreign investments, with implications for human rights, food security and the environment. Land concentration tends to involve concentration of decision-making about how land is to be used in the hands of a few. Without overemphasizing quantitative approaches, given the methodological caveats in quantifying the phenomenon, estimates of the scale of the rush for land, released since 2010, by organisations such as the World Bank, the Committee on World Food Security’s High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE) and the International Land Coalition, indicate that investors have acquired amounts of land ranging from 50 to 80 million hectares (ha) in the past few years. Between one-half and two-thirds of these land transfers relate to Africa and, according to an analysis of media reports by the World Bank, the biggest flow of investments is from investors based in Europe and Central Asia, thus confirming the importance of monitoring land-grabbing on the African continent and assessing the involvement of the EU. More importantly, these recent studies also reconfirm the devastating impacts these deals have on the local populations. Developing country governments, under pressure, are often led to negotiate deals that are not in the interests of their countries, and a large number of commercial land investments in Africa feature unbalanced contracts that protect and benefit investors to the detriment of the local population. In a context of high and volatile food prices, and with close to 1 billion people suffering from hunger, these deals generally threaten present and future food security and local livelihoods by imposing an export model on food insecure countries; jeopardising local 3
Page 1: (BIO)FUELING INJUSTICE? Europe’s
Page 5 and 6: The EU has various strategic intere
Page 7 and 8: or animal feed is turned over to gr
Page 9 and 10: Methodology: combining authoritativ
Page 11 and 12: Detailed recommendations To the EU
Page 13 and 14: d. Support sustainable small-scale
Page 15 and 16: plans, so that biofuels mandates an
Page 17 and 18: 5.2. Linking Europe biofuel policie
Page 19 and 20: List of boxes, figures and tables T
Page 21 and 22: RAI Principles for responsible agri
Page 23 and 24: ange of recent sources, including f
Page 25 and 26: 2. The evolution since 2010: the ri
Page 27 and 28: 2.2. A growing opposition Faced wit
Page 29 and 30: Commonwealth Development Corporatio
Page 31 and 32: Mozambique 10% ethanol and 5% biodi
Page 33 and 34: - standards for distribution of bio
Page 35 and 36: To summarise, the EU and its Member
Page 37 and 38: 4. Case studies Three case studies
Page 39 and 40: squirrels which damaged between 60%
Page 41 and 42: not, or not adequately, consulted,
Page 43 and 44: The Markala Sugar Project will also
Page 45 and 46: Peasants’ Conference against Land
Page 47 and 48: unit is “currently providing majo
Page 49 and 50: 5. How European biofuel policies dr
Page 51 and 52: iofuels between 2003 and 2006 (6.6
Page 53 and 54:
iofuels production should thus alwa
Page 55 and 56:
ecological and social impacts in pr
Page 57 and 58:
occur in these regions.” 232 Howe
Page 59 and 60:
5.2.4. Making land a bankable inves
Page 61 and 62:
6. The social, human rights and env
Page 63 and 64:
While agrofuel related crops are gr
Page 65 and 66:
should be remarked however that the
Page 67 and 68:
project”. In particular, the repo
Page 69 and 70:
it has nevertheless been shown abov
Page 71 and 72:
deductions to the company.” 348 G
Page 73 and 74:
mechanisms in African countries to
Page 75 and 76:
specialised in EU affairs suggests
Page 77 and 78:
climate change in June or July 2012
Page 79 and 80:
sometimes partial. 418 The findings
Page 81 and 82:
Another argument of the EU for its
Page 83 and 84:
8. The EU and EU Member States’ v
Page 85 and 86:
However, whereas the Commission spe
Page 87 and 88:
esources towards this goal. 479 Yet
Page 89 and 90:
conclude with absolute certitude wh
Page 91 and 92:
When potential negative impacts are
Page 93 and 94:
Access to remedies ETO Principle 37
Page 95 and 96:
9.2. The way forward: EU and its Me
Page 97 and 98:
Sources ActionAid and Friends of th
Page 99 and 100:
European Commission and Joint Resea
Page 101 and 102:
environmental data for the biofuels
Page 103 and 104:
Global Subsidies Initiative (GSI) o
Page 105 and 106:
United Nations Special Rapporteur o
Page 107 and 108:
AFRICAN NATIONAL OIL CORPORATI ON S
Page 109 and 110:
ITAL SENEGAL SARL BBE SA (BERTOLA B
Page 111 and 112:
LONHRO Agriculture (Subsidiary of L
Page 113 and 114:
Annex III. Jatropha related project
Page 115 and 116:
services delivery project of the Di
Page 117 and 118:
Source: Africa Europe Faith and Jus
Page 119 and 120:
GERMANY Flora EcoPower ETHIOPIA Oro
Page 121 and 122:
Investor country SWEDEN Sekab UNITE
Page 123 and 124:
SWEDISH SEKAB Bioenergy Tanzania Lt
Page 125 and 126:
KINGDOM BELGIUM Felisa Investor cou
Page 127 and 128:
Finally, a number of cases studies
Page 129 and 130:
political, economic and social back
Page 131 and 132:
Endnotes 1 A. Graham, S. Aubry, R.
Page 133 and 134:
31 For an overview of the intrsumen
Page 135 and 136:
68 The Commission is preparing a "E
Page 137 and 138:
100 Merian Research and CRBM, “Th
Page 139 and 140:
149 FIAN Germany, “Land Grabbing
Page 141 and 142:
193 C. Bowyer and B. Kretschmer,
Page 143 and 144:
230 J. W. van Gelder with L. German
Page 145 and 146:
264 P. B. Matondi and P. Mutopo,
Page 147 and 148:
298 L. Cotula, “Land deals in Afr
Page 149 and 150:
342 Bread for All, “Concerns of B
Page 151 and 152:
375 K. Havnenik, “Grabbing of Afr
Page 153 and 154:
419 E.g. “While inheritance laws
Page 155 and 156:
456 European Commission, “Increas
Page 157 and 158:
international organisations” in J
Page 159 and 160:
521 United Nations Special Rapporte
Page 161:
http://www.fian.org/resources/docum
show all

(Bio)Fueling Injustice? - Europafrica

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?