Jatropha carcus, a poisonous shrub is believed to have potential to yield oil. The investment companies are selling Jatropha as the new ‘green oil’ and claim it has the potential to alleviate poverty and improve livelihoods in developing countries. Following the Global trend India declared its biofuel policy in which bio-diesel, primarily from Jatropha would meet 20% of the diesel demand beginning with 2011-2012. It aims to plant some 14 million hectares of Jatropha by 2012. Huge financial investments are being made and policy mechanisms introduced for the promotion of large scale corporate sponsored ‘bio’ fuels. The hasty promotion of Jatropha plantation has already caused an expansion of large scale of mono-cropping. With the Indian government on the plan to cultivate Jatropha on million of hectares of land as part of its intensive drive to generate energy, critics are of the view that efforts should rather be focused on tackling the country’s chronic hunger problem.
Jatropha plantation has taken Nagaland and other handful States in the North-East by storm. In the north east region nearly 40,000 hectares of land where jhum cultivation has been practiced have begun to be covered with Jatropha plantations. In Nagaland itself Jatropha plantations have sprung up under various districts. With some companies distributing saplings free of cost, touring the villages to motivate farmers to undertake Jatropha cultivation to overcome poverty and backwardness (as they put it) report shows that there are nearly 4,000 cultivators in Nagaland. Investors and companies claim that Jatropha benefits local community by improving farming practices, stimulating local economies, generating income and allowing the use of marginal land. One of the plant’s biggest benefits the companies claim is that it thrives on low grade, marginal land and in semi-arid areas with poor soils, thus not competing with food production. However critics feel that farmers are being lured into substituting food crops for Jatropha through buyback guarantees where they are encouraged to sign contracts which they do not properly understand. Take for instance the contract farming for agrofuels such as the 30-year outgrower contracts being promoted in Zambia, Southern Africa by the Marli Investments (Biofuels in Africa). The contract is such that it is based on a loan system transferring control over production from the farmer to the company with false promises of a ‘guaranteed’ market. Farmers are lent the money to buy seed and chemicals, while additional fee for membership, administration, management and licensing services are levied upon them. The farmers are also expected to replace any trees that die at their own cost and are not permitted to sell to any other company. Such arrangements limit the options and control available to farmers and force them to deal with the company entirely on their terms. The contract once signed cannot be terminated for several years locking the farmer into Jatropha production regardless of the crop’s productivity. All their capacity is absorbed by the arduous cash crop, they rely on their sole harvest earnings to eat the whole year round. The question here is what if yields fall short of predictions?
At a time when the food prices are shooting up across the world, Jatropha plantation propagation is highly debatable. Staple foods are becoming less affordable for the poorest people and there is increased competition for cropland. Giving away agricultural land for the cultivation of Jatropha will have the food security compromised because the land for food is being used for crops destined for biofuels and that is linked to local rise in food prices. To sum it up, the plantation takes over their land which is central to the debates on food sovereignty. (The impact of agrofuels from a Right to Food Perspective)
Jatropha plantation cannot be considered as either a mitigation or adaptation solution to climate change crisis without addressing the real reasons why such change is actually taking place. It should be noted that the conversion of land or forest areas to energy crop mono-cropping had implications for climate change and sustainable use of natural resources. Mono-cropping often lead to contamination of the soil, rivers and spring waters due to intensive use of chemical products. Plantation such as Jatropha need irrigation to be economically viable and such plantations in an already water stress area can only create more climate crisis than resolving it. The widespread propagation of plants like Jatropha is likely to aggravate the dispossession of natural resources controlled by the marginalized rural group. It could bring more destruction than deliverance. (Fueling concerns-National Consultation on Biofuels in India, The real cost of Agrofuels-Global Forest Coalition)
The promotion of large scale corporate sponsored ‘agro’ fuels in the garb of improving energy security is yet another form of destroying the indigenous people’s interaction with the eco system. The rural and the forest communities not only support a multitude of livelihoods but also have a critical ecological role. The governments and the corporates in the process of pushing for ‘their’ fuels have restructured agriculture and have discouraged/eliminated small scale producers. Companies and governments on the other hand should stop investing in Jatropha until they have properly assessed its social and environmental impact. With an increase in corporative control over food chains and natural resources, the very survival of small scale food producers, family farming systems and traditional/indigenous knowledge and food system are destroyed. Therefore, there is a need for the State to implement legal tools and mechanisms to protect the ecological sustainability, to prevent water contamination, protect soil fertility and promote sustainable practices.
Promising and sweeping statements made about agrofuels should be reconsidered, given that the demand for these fuels generally comes from wealthier urban segments of national populations rather than those who actually live and depend on these ‘surplus’ lands. Baring all the facts the question is who profits from it anyways?
Asone Lüruo, Research Associate
Dice Foundation, Kohima.
