The Global Sociology Blog

In the past months, I have blogged rather extensively on the food crisis and the relationship to the growth of biofuels (see here, here, here, here , here , here , here and here ). In the context of the G8 meeting, the correlation between biofuel growth, poverty and hunger / food scarcity is again at the forefront of the discussions. As Ashley Seager puts it in the Guardian,

"The G8’s push for greater biofuel use has been a significant factor in driving 760 million people into food insecurity and putting them at risk of hunger in the past two years, ActionAid says today.

Released before next week’s G8 summit in Hokkaido, Japan, the charity’s report, Cereal Offenders, says the 82% rise in food commodity prices since 2006 has directly pushed 260 million people into risk of hunger as a result of the rich world’s drive for biofuels."

ActionAid’s report, Cereal Offenders (nice pun) promotes three measures to deal with this:

• Support a five-year moratorium on biofuel expansion, to prevent farmland being converted into biofuel plantations.
• End subsidies and targets aimed at increasing the use of ethanol and biodiesel in the US and EU.
• Scale up alternative renewable energy sources instead of subsidizing biofuels

More from the Guardian:

"Tom Sharman, ActionAid policy officer, said: "The global food crisis is creating poverty and hunger and it is being fuelled by policies and practices dictated by G8 nations … The rise of biofuel production and the increasing impact of climate change coupled with an unparalleled decrease in agricultural aid are creating a triple whammy for poor countries."

Nearly 30 years of agricultural aid policies have laid the foundation for today’s crisis, it says. Aid to farmers in developing countries has nearly halved since 1980 to under $4bn, or 3% of the total subsidies given to farmers in rich countries.

Aid has also been used to encourage governments to change their agricultural sectors towards production of export commodities such as fruit and vegetables, which rely on heavy use of fertilisers. Poor farmers cannot compete and large landowners and food companies have moved in, it says."

This comes on the heels of a confidential World Bank study that confirms that biofuels are responsible for 75% of the increase in the price of foods. This goes against the US contention that biofuels were responsible for only 3% of the increase (via Le Monde ). Biofuels are a major factor but there are others: drought in Australia, oil prices and financial speculation on food items. As the World Bank press release states

"Group of 8 leaders and major oil producers must "act now" to address the "man-made catastrophe" caused by high food and oil prices, World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick said prior to the G8 Summit in Hokkaido, Japan, July 7-9.

"We are entering a danger zone," warned Zoellick in a July 1 letter to Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, head of the upcoming G8 Summit. He added the crisis has worsened even since April.

For the first time since 1973, the world is being hit with a combination of record oil and food prices, threatening to drive over 100 million people into extreme poverty and reverse the gains made in overcoming poverty over the last seven years.

Some 41 countries have lost 3% to 10% of their GDP from rising food, fuel and commodity prices since January 2007. Over 30 countries have been hit by food riots, as the impact of the crisis reaches the household level."

The World Bank will increase its agriculture-related lending to over $6 billion with an additional $800 million for nutrition and social programs. It has called for a New Deal on Food Policy that 150 countries have already subscribed to. For Robert Zoellick, this is the main challenge for global times: can rich countries act fast enough and with enough resources to minimize the impact of the worst of the crisis on poor countries. I guess that’s an important item for the G8.

This report is actually quite explosive and this is why it was confidential, not released when completed in April and then leaked to the Guardian by the end of June. As Der Spiegel states,

"Still, in an atmosphere of growing criticism of biofuels and increasing concern over the impact of rising food prices, the report is a bombshell. It estimates that rising energy and fertilizer costs have only accounted for a food price jump of 15 percent. Even the environmental group Oxfam hasn’t gone as far as the World Bank report. In a study released at the end of June, called "Another Inconvenient Truth," Oxfam said that biofuels have driven more than 30 million people into poverty — but had contributed just 30 percent to the global food price rise.

"Political leaders seem intent on suppressing and ignoring the strong evidence that biofuels are a major factor in recent food price rises," Oxfam policy advisor Robert Bailey told the Guardian on Friday.

Demand for biofuels has risen significantly in recent years as industrialized countries seek to cut CO2 emissions by relying more on renewable energy sources. In April, London introduced new regulations requiring that 2.5 percent of fuel sold at pumps in the United Kingdom be composed of biofuels with the mixture to be boosted to 5 percent in 2010. The European Union has set itself a goal of a 10 percent admixture by 2020 across the continent. US President George W. Bush has also latched onto bio-ethanol as a way to reduce America’s independence on foreign oil."

What’s the hold up then? Well, apart from the companies that make money out of biofuels and the enormous subsidies they get, the European Commission is throwing its weight behind biofuels, as explained in Le Nouvel Observateur. While acknowledging that biofuels are not the only solution to reduce our oil consumption, the Commission maintains that it is the only solution on the short-term against global warming. So, while they remain hopeful that other clean and renewable sources of energy will be found in the future, in the meantime, biofuels are it.