(Bio)Fueling Injustice? - Europafrica

growing agrofuel feedstocks, and thus more food has to be produced outside of the
EU and imported. Lessons in this regard can be learned from the experience of the
US, where such a phenomenon has occurred. This is an unaccounted way for the EU
to outsource part of its food production as a result of its biofuel demand. By using
African land to help meet its food needs, the EU puts additional pressure on land in
other countries and contributes to land grabbing.
Third, the EU biofuel policy artificially boosts the economic value of land and
generates additional interest on the part of speculators. This is the so-called
phenomenon of “land banking,” whereby investments in land are made not to produce
crops, but to speculate with the prospect of a juicy future added value. The EU biofuel
policy gives a signal and the necessary confidence to investors to grab African land.
Importantly, because it is focused on quantitative objectives, placing priority on
technological and market-based solutions, the EU biofuel policy tends to encourage
large-scale industrial agricultural production. It thereby helps to transform land into
a commodity, ignoring its social and cultural values, and promotes the very model of
agriculture which has been demonstrated to contribute heavily to climate change and
food insecurity.
The land acquisitions related to agrofuels constitute one of the most clear-cut forms
of land grabbing, since they involve the concentration of land for export commercial
purposes.
The EU biofuel policy has negative effects on food security,
governance and human rights
In addition to the usual impacts of land-grabbing, large-scale land acquisitions for
agrofuels have specific negative consequences. Agrofuel projects violate a range of
human rights. In particular, the food security and the right to food of African people
are affected because of reduced and insecure access to land for small-scale farmers
to produce locally consumed food, and because agrofuels stimulate high and volatile
food prices at the global level. There are different views as to the exact extent to which
agrofuels contribute to raising food prices but, without entering into a battle of figures,
most studies tend to find that they play a significant role.
Most deals in Africa take place in countries where governance is already weak, and
the amount of money involved in agrofuel-related projects engender further
governance issues. Biofuel land deals often tear local communities apart and
provoke social conflicts.
Some investors take advantage of the lack of regulation in host countries to maximise
their benefits and exploit natural resources to their profit. The added value of
agrofuel projects is captured mainly by international investors and local elites,
whereas the local economy is disrupted and the population gets little economic
benefit, contradicting the argument that additional income can compensate for the
export of commodities needed locally.
Finally, the impact of biofuels on the environment is disputed. Recent controversy
about indirect land-use change (ILUC) –when land previously used to grow food
6