Publication: Adjusting Biofuel Policies to Meet Social and Rural Development Needs: Analysing the Experiences of Brazil, India and Indonesia
Loading...
item.page.format.extent
item.page.description.firstpage
item.page.description.lastpage
Date
Publication data
item.page.date.series
item.page.date.event
item.page.organization.date
item.page.date.submitted
item.page.project.date
item.page.description.edition
Language
eng
item.page.coverage.spatial
item.page.coverage.temporal
item.page.location.country
Brasil
organization.page.location.country
item.page.type.events
item.page.type
item.page.degree.level
item.page.source.urlsource
ISBN
ISSN
DOI
dARK
item.page.project.ID
item.page.project.productID
Copyright Holder
International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth
United Nations Development Programme
United Nations Development Programme
Access to Information
Acesso Aberto
Terms of Use
O texto e dados desta publicação podem ser reproduzidos desde que as fontes sejam citadas. Reproduções com fins comerciais são proibidas.
item.page.title.alternative
item.page.organization.alternative
item.page.name.variant
item.page.contributor.author
Advisor
item.page.contributor.editor
item.page.contributor.thesiscommitee
item.page.contributor.organizer
item.page.contributor.coordinator
item.page.contributor.other
item.page.relation.ispartofseries
Speaker / Moderator / Discussant
Abstract
This brief examines the social dimensions of the rapid expansion of biofuels as a key element of ‘green economies’ in the making. It compares three different contexts (Brazil, India and Indonesia) in the developing world, where biofuels have been often promoted under the arguments of poverty alleviation, social inclusion and rural development. The assessment reveals a general mismatch between the social discourse and the biofuel policy instruments adopted. Benefits to poor people in rural areas have been very limited, and far too often they have been left worse off after being incorporated in biofuel production chains under disadvantageous conditions. Better outcomes depend crucially on: (i) building on traditional livelihoods, rather than attempting to replace them; (ii) involving social movements in policy- and decision-making to ensure due consideration of the needs and interests of poor people in rural areas; and (iii) inserting provisions that allow smallholders to climb up the value chain, thus addressing the inequality structures that keep poor people poor. (…)
