Forests, food, and fuel in the tropics: the uneven social and ecological consequences of the emerging political economy of biofuels

Background

Since 2007, the expanding global political economy of biofuels may worsen inequalities among nations and rural populations in the global South. This unfolds as key biofuel sources (sugar, oil palm, soy) are already integrated into industrial agriculture and forestry. Initial optimism about biofuels fostering sustainable development waned after links to higher food prices and deforestation emerged, and studies questioned their carbon neutrality, especially for food-based biofuels. New biofuel partnerships seem to intensify pressure on tropical forest ecosystems and further dispossess marginalized groups with insecure land rights. Shifting global economics, particularly growing South-South investment and trade, exacerbates unsustainable resource use and environmental decline in many developing countries.

Goals and Methods

This paper analyzes how biofuel alliances among corporations, governments, and producers shape ecological change in tropical forest communities through a global political economy perspective. The authors explore the impact of these alliances by examining economic and political relationships at international and domestic levels. They contend that consequences depend on state institutions, biofuel market entry timing, and historical state-society relations. Drawing on existing industrial agriculture patterns for sugar, oil palm, and soy (key biofuel sources), the analysis addresses state control/benefits, corporate social responsibility (CSR) effectiveness without regulation, which rural groups gain/lose, and forest/ecosystem impacts. The study uses theoretical frameworks to predict biofuel development trajectories and their impacts.

Conclusions and Takeaways

The global biofuel industry's rise, driven by alliances of multinational corporations, governments, and local producers, will likely worsen inequalities within and between Southern nations. Multinational corporations will likely gain more control over biofuel production and distribution, particularly for key resources. States with weak bureaucracies will likely lose control over partnerships, strengthening corporate power. Without strong government oversight, voluntary corporate social responsibility efforts will likely fail to protect the environment and society. While some states with existing market ties and strong institutions might see overall economic gains, these benefits will be unevenly shared. Vulnerable populations, including subsistence farmers, indigenous peoples, and those with insecure land rights, will disproportionately bear the costs of biofuel development, facing displacement and further hardship.