Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 42
Development and Sustainability?
Agrofuels: Crossroads in Argentina’s Discourses
Florencia Dorina Boffi
INSTITUTIONEN FÖR GEOVETENSKAPER
Development and sustainability? Agrofuels: Crossroads in Argentina’s discourses
Florencia Dorina Boffi
Degree Project 30 HEC Master of Science in Sustainable Development Uppsala - 2011
i
Development and sustainability? Agrofuels: Crossroads in Argentina discourses
Florencia Dorina Boffi
Supervisor: Associate professor Gloria L. Gallardo Fernández , CSD-CEMUS, Uppsala University
Credits: 30 HEC Level: Advanced E Course title: Degree Project in Sustainable Development Course code: 1GV038 Programme: Master Programme in Sustainable Development
Place of publication: Uppsala Year of publication: 2011
Key words: Agrofuels, Critical Discourse Analysis, hegemonic discourse, development, externalities.
Uppsala University Centre for Environment and Development Studies (CEMUS)
ii Acknowledgements
First of all I would like to thank Uppsala University for giving me the opportunity to join the Master’s Programme in Sustainable Development. In addition, I would like to thank the Swedish State for giving me the chance to study a Master free of tuition fees and the Argentinean State for having a public education system which allowed me to open my frontiers. What I really appreciate from this experience was the high level of its professors, the efficiency at all time whenever I needed help and the opportunity for being part of a multicultural and interdisciplinary learning process. I would like to thank gratefully to Gloria Gallardo Fernández for her support and her fruitful feedbacks during my working process. All this studying abroad experience allowed me to realize and value the quality and generosity of the people near me. Special thanks for: my mum, dad, brothers, sister, friends from different parts of the world and Joaquín. Thank you from the bottom of my heart…
iii Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is to provide an analysis of how agrofuel discourses in Argentina represent particular economic and political interests. The chosen period (2007-2010) obeys to the fact that 2007 was the year where the law for Promotion of Sustainable Agrofuel was enforced. The methodological approach of the thesis suggests that discourses represent a systematic way of ordering meanings, practices and knowledge. What can be understood from this study is that the interest shown on agrofuels lies ultimately not in the care of the environment, but rather to generate agri-industrial production centers that can give added value to raw materials for export.
iv Table of contents
I. Introduction ...... 1 1. Purpose ...... 3 2. Conceptual and Methodological approach ...... 3 3. Scope and Limitations ...... 4 II. Background ...... 5 1. Global Scale ...... 5 2. Local Scale ...... 8 Argentina in numbers ...... 8 Agrofuel Industry ...... 11 III. Critical Discourse Analysis ...... 19 IV. Discussion and Conclusion ...... 25 V. Bibliography ...... 28
v List of Figures Figure 1 Biomass potential in Argentina ...... 2 Figure 2 Simplified plot of agrofuels ...... 5 Figure 4 Agrodiesel production, trade and price trends ...... 7 Figure 5 Argentina GDP from 2000-2010 ...... 8 Figure 6 Permanent household survey, incidence of poverty and indigence 2005 till 2010...... 8 Figure 7 Unemployment rate 2005-2010...... 9 Figure 8 Evolution of Gini coefficient in Argentina from 2005-2010 ...... 9 Figure 10 Evolution of the agrodiesel production capacity ...... 12 Figure 12 Number of farms & land cost ...... 14 Figure 13 Soybean farmer’s productive structure ...... 15 Figure 14 Map of Agrodiesel industries in Argentina and of the province of Santa Fe . 17
List of tables Table 1 Agrodiesel Production ...... 12 Table 2 Agroethanol Production ...... 13 Table 3 Some of agrofuel actors...... 18
vi List of abbreviations
CADER- The Argentine Renewable Energies Chamber CLACSO -Latin America Board of Social Sciences CONICET- National Council of Scientific and Technical Research CDM- Clean development mechanism EC – European Commission ECLAC- Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean EU – European Union FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization FFS – Fondo Federal Solidario GDP – Gross Domestic Product GHG – Greenhouse gases GMO – Genetically Modified Organisms HDI – Human Development Index IDB- Interamerican Development Bank INDEC- National Institute of Statistics and Censuses INTA- National Institute of Agricultural Technology INTI- National Institute of Industrial Technology IPCC- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change JI- Joint implementation MDG – Millennium Development Goals OECD – Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development RED – Renewable Energy Directive RR – Roundup Resistant UNCD- United Nations and Commonwealth Department UNDP – United Nations Development Program UN-ECLAC – United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
vii I. Introduction In the last ten years, agrofuels have not only become part of the international agenda in the fields of energy but also in the agri-food and climate change fields. Policies for the production and use of agrofuels were set up in a global scale challenging the sustainability of the agricultural system and food security (Razo et al. 2007, Faaij & Londo 2010, Eide 2008). In this paper, I will rather use the term agrofuel instead of using biofuel considering that this expression reflects more the idea of where this resource comes from. The concept of biofuel can mislead to the idea connected to “life” or “green” and this does not seem the exact representation that really entails (Ecología Política 2007). Several international organisms have pointed out their views in connection to agrofuels. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), in its 2008 report, The State of Food and Agriculture , uncovers that whereas agrofuels will counterbalance just a modest share of fossil energy use over the next decade, they will have much bigger impacts on agriculture and food security. More to the point, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) states in a report of 2009 that the growing global interest in agrofuels is driven by different factors. ECLAC mentions at first the geopolitical goal for many developed countries (especially the U.S. and the EU member countries) of reducing the energy dependence in fossil fuels. This is mainly due to the need to limit the external shocks in the fossil fuels market particularly considering the role of India and China in the growing global energy demand. Secondly, the use of agrofuels is promoted to reduce greenhouse gases emissions in the transport sector; these are believed to be one of the main causes of global warming and thus the grounds for the promotion of agrofuels policies in the European Union (Chidiak & Stanley 2009). However, energy efficiency investigations on agrofuels in comparison with fossil fuel (environmental impacts and energy balance) are not uniform since they vary depending on the farming practices, culture and region where the agrofuel is produced. Furthermore, ECLAC considers agrofuels as a means to reduce poverty and as a way to improve rural incomes. From this perspective, the agrofuel production and use is seen as a development strategy for many lower 1 income countries and as a way to add more value to their exports (Chidiak & Stanley 2009). On the other hand, the same ECLAC report includes the agrofuels dilemma of food versus energy, that underlines the problem of food security which generates a negative impact on food availability and 2 on the increased in food prices . Another risk is associated with deforestation and biodiversity loss in some regions where agrofuels are expanding the agricultural frontier (Chidiak & Stanley 2009).
1 Both international organisms FAO & ECLAC are part from the UN. 2 Although in the last year’s food prices were the highest in the world history levels, in the years to come some studies announced that prices increase would be even greater than in the past years (Chidiak & Stanley 2009).
1 This study demonstrates the motivations for developing agrofuels in Argentina and how discursive constructions from the hegemonic groups reinforce certain conceptions of development. By showing the arguments used by the powerful groups to maintain and legitimize the emergence of agrofuels there can be a better understanding of the interests behind those perspectives and the connection between the processes of environmental degradation, trade and socio-economic development (Friman & Gallardo Fernández, 2010). These connections allow a systematic existence of meaning which shapes the content of cognition (what to say or think). In other words the system sets up the guide for action, who has the authority to speak, from what perspective, in connection to what level of knowledge (Escobar 1997). The importance of this relies on how the content and structure of discourses directly affect agrofuel practices. There are few academic studies that have put the focus on analyzing the discourses of agrofuels but none of them referred to Argentina. This is an overview which can lead to further research about this topic. Social reality is the result of the articulation of knowledge and power that becomes into being- if through discourses. As the Colombian anthropologist Arturo Escobar brings in, development started to operate as a discourse having economic growth and capital investment as part of the components to supply modernization of the society (Escobar 1997). Since the nineteenth century Argentina developed an agro-export model that showed it dependence of the international demand. In the present context, Argentina 3 has a significant agricultural potential for the production of agrofuels (Razo et al . 2007). Based on its resources abundance together with the temperature and the rain regimes Argentina has comparative advantages for food and biomass production (FAO 2009; Manuel-Navarrete et al. 2005). The Figure 1 shows the biomass potential in Argentina.
Figure 1 Biomass potential in Argentina Source: Secretary of Energy, Argentina State Planification Ministry. Genren Program 2009.
The integration of Argentina in the global economy unveils an unequal exchange. An example of this is that although the agricultural sector in Argentina produces more than three times as much
3 Argentina is the third largest soybean producer (after US and Brazil), biggest exporter of soybean oil, sixth largest maize producer and second largest exporter of maize (Scheinkerman de Obschatko & Begenisic 2005).
2 food than is required by the population undernourishment exists (Tomei & Upham 2009). Different 4 indexes show that since 2003 Argentina has experienced a positive socio-economic performance . As it is shown in Figure 5 the GDP had an annual average growth of 7,6%. Also, poverty index and inequality have decreased in the last years in Argentina as it is showed in the reduction of the Gini 5 coefficient (see Figure 8), and there was also a decrease of poverty and indigence index (see Figure 6). In this context some research questions arise: what do hegemonic discourses reflect and how do these discourses affect the social, economic and environmental spheres. In other words how do development and sustainability interact?
1. Purpose The purpose of this thesis is to provide an analysis of how agrofuel discourses in Argentina represent particular economic and political interests, focusing on how sustainability and development are represented in that discourse. The chosen period (2007-2010) obeys to the fact that 2007 was the year where the law for Promotion of Sustainable Agrofuel (Régimen de 6 Regulación y Promoción para la Producción y Uso Sustentables de Biocombustibles) was enforced . The two main objectives are: 1) to illustrate how the economic and political discourse in Argentina from 2007 till 2010 was used to justify agrofuel policies. The way to achieve this objective is to identify the role played by the main social actors and analyze the arguments used by the hegemonic discourse to install them in the public opinion and 2) to analyze how these discourses in Argentina anchor the belief in the collective imaginary that this was the most convenient option. The way to accomplish this second objective is to examine the arguments used to connect this economic model with the idea of wealth distribution and to analyze the facts used to reveal the sustainability issues connected to the production.
2. Conceptual and Methodological approach To understand the complexity of agrofuels I choose a discourse analysis approach. The multidisciplinary characteristic of this approach and method can be fruitful in order to generate new questions and open new research exploration avenues (Gillen & Petersen 2005). Discourse analysis encircles diverse methods in the exploration of human communication (Gillen & Petersen 2005). I will opt for the perspective known as critical discourse analysis (CDA)
4 This performance should be considered in relation to the socio-economic crisis suffered in 2001-2002. Since 2003 Argentina has been going through a steady economic growth (Kosacoff 2007). 5 The Gini coefficient measures the inequality of a distribution; zero represents the most equitable situation and one the maximal inequitable. 6 The promotion was passed in the Congress year 2006.
3 that studies the uses and abuses of power and how dominance and inequality are recreated in the social and political context (Schiffrin et al . 2001). The aim of the CDA is to illuminate the rationale of social action. It is linked with the Foucauldian methodology where power relations are defined in terms of control and rules that reflect just the power of the dominant groups, taking the form of what Gramsci called "hegemony" (Schiffrin et al . 2001). From Foucault, perspective, power is what establishes what is true or false, in other words, power is inseparable from knowledge. By exposing the power relations that surround contemporary environmental problematic the unequal development discourse can come to light (Friman & Gallardo 2010). The relevant point to expose is how do powerful groups control public discourse and how does such discourses control mind and action of the less powerful groups. There are social consequences that arise in response to the control; social inequality could be one example of this. The access or control over public discourse is an important "symbolic" resource, as is the case for knowledge and information. These can provide us with a very general picture of how discourse is involved in dominance (power abuse) and in the production and reproduction of social inequality (Schiffrin et al . 2001). In order to investigate the agrofuels domain in Argentina data from literature, newspaper articles and speeches was collected to have a holistic understanding. I chose eight speeches which I believe are crucial to understand the scope of agrofuels dynamics in Argentina. These speeches were delivered by the President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, by the Planification Minister Julio De Vido, by the Minister of Economy Felisa Miceli (2007), by the Minister of Economy Martín Lousteau (2008) and by the Energy Secretary Daniel Cameron. Articles from the period 2007 and 2010 were chosen mainly from two different newspapers in Argentina, Clarín and Página 12. Clarín is one of the widely read newspapers in Latin America (Press reference 2010). They have different owners, styles and audiences consequently they are less likely to share the same perspectives.
3. Scope and Limitations Among the agrofuels I will limit myself only to the liquid fuels: agrodiesel and agroethanol. The boundaries will cover only the Argentinean case although other South American countries may go through similar processes.
4 II. Background 1. Global Scale Despite the great expectations directed to agrofuels (mainly from powerful economic and political groups), they appear to be neither a solution to the energy crisis, much less to the climate warming, but rather are revealed as a serious threat to the environment, particularly in the Global South. Agrofuels appear as a dangerous factor that worsens the food crisis albeit a very profitable exit for the capital crisis with huge social and political costs in developing countries (Houtart 2009). In order to consider agrofuels sustainable systems there should have economic benefits, preserve the natural resources and encourage social justice (Payne 2010).
Production Supply Demand
Oil crops AgrofuelsLiquids Vegetable oil Transerterification Blending & SOYBEAN Distribution Agrodiesel
Feedstock production
Sugar & Starch plant Sugar extraction Distillation Blending & Agro SUGAR CANE Distribution ethanol
Demand Production Supply Figure 2 Simplified plot of agrofuels Source: Adapted from Lamers P, McCormick K, Hilbert J, 2008
Agrofuels are part of a value chain that involved different sectors (See Figure 2). Their production has two main cycles: the agricultural cycle, which corresponds to the planting, cultivating and harvesting of the plant, and the industrial or processing cycle where the raw material is transformed into agroethanol or agrodiesel (Pérez- Rincón 2008). Agroethanol is based on feedstock’s containing either sugar or starch and agrodiesel can be extracted from most oilseed crops (Payne 2010). 7 Many studies have uncovered that agrofuels can reduce green house emission by 20-60 % however this only takes into account the combustion itself, nor the change in the land use, land deforestation, biodiversity loss or of the ecological preservation that this could imply large carbon losses. In addition social justice, food insecurity and political instability are part of the externalities that this agri-industrial production can generate (Payne 2010). According to the Fourth Assessment Report (2007) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), climate is getting warmer due to the increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gases (UN 2008). People are more fretful with the thought that the emissions of this gas should be reduced (Hernádez S et al . 2010). As a
7 This number is for first generation of agrofuels, the second generation reduce by 70 or 90%.
5 consequence of this concern, measures and actions to mitigate global warming are taken place in 8 the whole world. In this way the Kyoto Protocol, has set different goals towards reducing climate change (FAO 2008).
Considering that fossil fuels are the major cause of CO2, emissions policies have been created around the world for the use of agrofuels as complements or substitutes for diesel or petrol for transport purposes. Governments from the Agroethanol Canada EU, U.S, Brazil and Argentina, amongst others, Agroethanol have adopted tax incentives and national Brazil Agroethanol blending mandates (Khanna et al . 2010). China Agroethanol These measures affected directly the grain and EU Agroethanol oilseed market becoming the driving force of India Agrodiesel the increase of international food prices and in USA consequence impacting human welfare (See Agrodiesel Europe Figure 3 for agrofuel world production). Other Agrofuel In 2008 the petroleum prices peak at US$120 per barrel, originating an increase in the Figure 3 World Liquid Agrofuel Production Source: Hilbert 2009 demand of agrofuels (Ewing & Msangi 2008). In
2009 there was a historical peak of the world hunger, FAO estimates than more than one billion people were undernourished worldwide in that year; this is about 100 million people more than in 2008 and around one-sixth of all humanity. Food security has grown worse since 1995 and a decrease on child malnutrition is evolving slower than they should to meet the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target of reducing half the hunger by 2015 (Tirado et al. 2010). Climate change, the loss of ecosystems’ services and the growing use of food crops, as a source of fuel, together with the financial crisis, has contributed to the food crisis (Tirado et al. 2010). The major threats that are challenging the international agenda to face hunger and malnutrition show the relations and how do they interconnect. 9 The poorest countries are the one the suffering the most . Various countries started to develop agrofuels although food security and poverty are still big problems. For developing countries that are food importers the situation is even worst. As long as the trend of high food prices continue raising it will be almost impossible to obtain their food supplies (Ewing & Msangi 2008).
8 The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement where the industrialized countries compromise for the major responsibility of the high levels of greenhouse gases and agree to reduce the GHG emissions. The Protocol establishes three market-based mechanisms to fulfill this: emissions trading (carbon market), Clean development mechanism (CDM) and Joint implementation (JI) (UNFCCC 2010). USA was one of the countries that didn’t sign being the country that produce most emissions. 9 Sometimes poor people have to spend half of their incomes on food.
6 The numbers of investments during the last years in the agrofuel industry is driving to rethink the agri-business model. There are new and powerful actors converging in the sector. Cosmetics companies are selling agrodiesel, Wall Street speculators have signed agreements with feudal barons of the sugar. Flows of money are linking the most brutal landowners-class from the South to the most powerful companies in the North (Vicente 2008).
50000 World agrodiesel 160 Production 45000 World agrodiesel 140 40000 Trade US$perhectolitre World agrodiesel Price 120
Volume (billion Volume litres) 35000
100 30000
25000 80
20000 60
15000 40 10000
20 5000
0 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Figure 4 Agrodiesel production, trade and price trends Source: OECD-FAO 2010, p. 84
Due to the debates in connection with the potential externalities agrofuels produce there has been a demand for a global certification for agrofuels so it can guarantee a sustainable production (Tomei & Upham 2009). Latin America is usually considered rich in biodiversity and has become one of the World regions where agrofuels are being expanded. Most of South American countries have showed their interest in developing agrofuel projects and to accomplish their own blending goals for agrofuel consumption. In most of the countries governments have offered incentives and other type of promotion for agrofuels (Chidiak & Stanley 2009).
7 2. Local Scale Argentina in numbers Argentina is going through an uninterrupted increase in the GDP since 2003 of an average of 7,6% as Figure 5 shows, reaching in 2010 a nominal GDP of 7.675 USD per capita, and an annual average 10 high inflation rate of 10,7% (INDEC 2010).
450.000 15%
400.000 10% 350.000
300.000 5%
250.000 0% 200.000
150.000 -5% Annual GDP (AR $) (AR Annual GDP Annualgrowth GDP 100.000 -10% 50.000
0 -15% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 5 Argentina GDP from 2000-2010 Source: Ministry of Economy (MECON)
There are several social indicators that have changed remarkably in the last years. From 2003 to 2010, the urban poverty index decreased from 54% to 12% (see Figure 6).
45
% Indigence 40 Poverty 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1st Sem – 2005 – 1st Sem 2006 – 1st Sem 2007 – 1st Sem 2008 – 1st Sem 2009 – 1st Sem 2010 – 1st Sem 2nd Sem – 2005 – Sem 2nd 2006 – Sem 2nd 2007 – Sem 2nd 2008 – Sem 2nd 2009 – Sem 2nd
Figure 6 Permanent household survey, incidence of poverty and indigence 2005 till 2010 Source: National Institute of Statistics and Censuses (INDEC 2010)
11 In addition the Human Development Index (HDI) rose from 0,734 (in 2000) to 0,775. This was a result of social assistance programs and a consequence of the decrease of unemployment rate from 20,4% to 7,5% (see Figure 7).
10 It is necessary to clarify that these calculations in Argentina were criticized. The National Static Office was really was accused to change and hide some information. Private estimations double these numbers. Moreover from 2005 they started using another methodology to measure poverty as a consequence this has changed the indexes assessment.
8
30,0 % 25,0
20,0
15,0
Unemployment without considering 10,0 social assitance Unemployment 5,0
0,0 1stTrim-2005 Trim-2005 4th 1stTrim-2006 Trim-2006 4th 1stTrim-2007 Trim-2007 4th 1stTrim-2008 Trim-2008 4th 1stTrim-2009 Trim-2009 4th 1stTrim-2010 3rdTrim-2005 3rdTrim-2006 3rdTrim-2007 3rdTrim-2008 3rdTrim-2009 2nd Trim-2005 2nd Trim-2006 2nd Trim-2007 2nd Trim-2008 2nd Trim-2009 2nd Trim-2010 2nd Figure 7 Unemployment rate 2005-2010 Source: INDEC (National Institute of Statistics and Censuses)
Furthermore in 2003 the gap between the 10% richer and the 10% poorer was 33, and although it improved in 2010 to 25,3 (see Figure 8) there is still an unequal wealth distribution. It is even worst if we considered the different provinces along the country (INDEC 2010; PNUD 2010).
0,5 0,49 0,48 0,47 0,46 Gini Index 0,45 0,44 0,43 0,42 0,41 0,4 0,39 0,38 0,37 0,36 0,35 1st Trim-2005 1st Trim-2006 1st Trim-2007 1st Trim-2008 1st Trim-2009 1st Trim-2010 1st 3rdTrim-2005 4thTrim-2005 3rdTrim-2006 4thTrim-2006 3rdTrim-2007 4thTrim-2007 3rdTrim-2008 4thTrim-2008 3rdTrim-2009 4thTrim-2009 2ndTrim-2005 2ndTrim-2006 2ndTrim-2007 2ndTrim-2008 2ndTrim-2009
Figure 8 Evolution of Gini coefficient in Argentina from 2005-2010 Source: Ministry of Economy (MECON)
The Argentinean agricultural sector is very influential due to its high share of the country’s GDP and its strategic role in the country’s export ranking. It implies 9.2% of the GDP and more than 50% of national exports. In terms of employment, the agricultural sector employs 1% of the population directly, and around 37% indirectly. The sector is export oriented, mainly European countries and
11 The Human Development Index HDI was created by de PNUD and it includes data on life expectancy, education and GDP per-capita.
9 China are generating the demand that Argentina is supplying. Likewise the key driver of this industry in Argentina is economic growth rather than reducing emissions of greenhouse gases (Asal et al . 2006; Tomei & Upham 2009). In recent years, Argentina's agricultural sector experienced a transformation that changed their production techniques and technologies and have an impact in the social conditions in the countryside. One of the core elements of this process was that soybean production has become the main agricultural product and one of the most important exportable goods (Pérez 2007). This new way of producing is known as the agri-business model (Pérez 2007). Since the 1970s, the area under arable production for the main agricultural products (wheat, sunflower, maize and soybean) has increased from 21 million hectares (Mha) to 32 Mha in 2007 (FAO 2008; Tomei & Upham 2009). In 1996 genetic modified soybean was adopted. The seed is known as Roundup Ready (RR) and it was developed by the US multinational Company Monsanto. Nowadays almost all soybean production is genetically modified and over 53% of the agricultural 12 land area produces soybean (Scheinkerman de Obschatko & Begenisic 2005).
Figure 9 Safety guard monitoring the new varieties of GM soybean at an Agricultural Fair, Expoagro 2011 . Photo by Florencia Boffi
The deregulation, privatization and liberalization process of the economy during 1990 had a strong impact on the land tenure structure. The new economic conditions force many producers to sell their properties, give it on lease or pay a third party for services of planting and harvesting. In
12 There was a special expansion of soybean as a consequence of the higher profitability compared to other crops (Asal et al . 2006) and by the use of a ‘technological package’ which includes: GM seed, no-tillage, glyphosate, and strong pressure on traditional ‘marginal’ and non-crop areas.
10 this way small and middle-landowners owners transferred their business to other economic actors, such as; sowing-pools, investment funds or contractors (Chidiak & Stanley 2009). Los Grobo in Argentina is one of the most known agri-industrial company. Some outlines from the industrial agriculture in Argentina are shown underneath: - A production system that tends to the concentration of wealth (including land) in few hands, due to the large scale of land required for being more competitive - A technological package that creates dependence on corporations that supply pesticides (that are intensively use) and GMO transgenic seeds. - The risk of having a low diversified production model that threatens the biodiversity of the country due to the extraordinary growth of soybean mono-crop (Dominguez & Sabatino 2006).
Agrofuel Industry
In the end of the seventies, agrofuel sector was driven with the launch of the Alconafta Plan which flourished in the Northwest (using sugar cane as feedstock). A number of factors such as bad harvests, low prices for traditional fuels and internal conditions unfavorable, led to the abandonment of that plan late 1980 (Lamers, McCormick, Hilbert 2008). During 1990, Argentina suffered deep changes in the whole economy due to a neo-liberal economy policy consisting of privatization, deregulation and opening of the market. For the rural areas, the institutional transformation led to the removal of regulatory bodies, the globalization of production and consumer markets, and the emergence of new actors in the sector such as the multinationals agri-business (Kosacoff 2007). Since 2000, the National government restarted a number of programs that oriented the production of agrofuels. Nevertheless these programs did not have great impact on developing the sector; they have limited resources and little coordination between them (Kosacoff 2007). In 2006 the National Law 26.093 for the Promotion and sustainable regulation regime for agrofuels (Ley de Promoción y Regulación del Uso Sustentable de Biocombustibles) was passed to the Congress and one year after it was regulated. Starting from January 2010 the law set up a mandatory minimum blending of 5% of agrofuels in commercialize fuels (in particular, 5% ethanol blended with gasoline, and 5% agrodiesel blended into diesel fuel or diesel). In addition the law established a tax incentives scheme for tax exemptions for 15 years and compensations on soybean and soybean by-products that are exported. The regulations prioritize agricultural producers, SMEs and regional economies. In September 2007, an amendment was incorporated to the law which 13 included agroethanol (from sugar cane) to the promotional scheme (Chidiak & Stanley 2009).
13 The mills were excluded because they do not get 50% of its income from farming but industry.
11 A series of political conflicts took place in 2008 when the Government implemented an increase in the export taxes for the grains. Soybean increased from 32% to a sliding scale of 50%. This influenced the agrodiesel production because countries which were importing agrofuel from Argentina were facing an increased of 32% of the cost of oil. The agrodiesel has an export tax of 17% due to reimbursements. From March till August the country was in the middle of roadblocks, strikes and marches and as a consequence diminished the agricultural exports (Giarraca, Teubal, Palmisano 2008). 14 In September 2010, the blending target increased 7 % (Resolution 828/2010), with the idea of reducing the GHG emission and of reducing the amount of fossil fuels imports (INFOLEG, 2010). AGRODIESEL Production Local Trade Exports Period (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) 2008 712,066 274,000 687,645 2009 1,179,150 499,000 1,148,488 2010 1,814,902 508,275 1,358,453 Table 1 Agrodiesel Production Source: INDEC 2011
Table 1 shows the increased rise in the production of agrodiesel. Since 2008 the production rose 155% and if we consider the installed capacity the national agrodiesel industry has grown 2250% since 2006 and is suppose to have more than three million tones of installed capacity at the end of 2011.
3.500.000 3.084.000 Tonnes
3.000.000 2.487.000 2.500.000 2.087.100
2.000.000
1.353.500 1.500.000
1.000.000 560.000
500.000 130.000
0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Figure 10 Evolution of the agrodiesel production capacity Source: Author, based on The Argentine Renewable Energies Chamber (CADER 2011)
14 In 2011 it will rise to 10 %
12 The main dilemma that introduces the development of agrofuels in Argentina is related to the expansion of soybean, and the advantages and disadvantages that this entails (Chidiak & Stanley 2009). Agrodiesel have captured almost all the attention in Argentina and left the presence of agroethanol somehow opaque. However the latter one has a relevant participation worldwide. Liquid agrofuels cover 2% of global market and within that 2%, over 90% is mainly alcohol from sugar cane and corn and only 10% is from agrodiesel (Hilbert 2007). AGROETHANOL Period Production(tonnes) Local Trade (tonnes) 2009 18,439 2,109 2010 96,034 93,140 Table 2 Agroethanol Production Source: INDEC 2011
An agroethanol market with similar characteristics as the agrodiesel market doesn’t seem to develop in the medium term although there are also blending requirements. Argentina has very efficient competitors such as Brazil and USA (Hilbert 2007). Moreover the incentive mechanisms established by law are not enough to compensate high investment of agroethanol plant (Lamers, McCormick, Hilbert 2008). Agroethanol is produced from feedstock that includes sugar and can be transformed into alcohol. Figure 2 shows the whole process of extraction from the plant, the fermentation process and distillation (Lamers, McCormick, Hilbert 2008). Twenty three companies control the sugar cane production. They are located in the provinces of Tucumán, Salta and Jujuy which are in the Northern part of the country. There is a small production of sugar cane therefore there has been a small development of the agroethanol market (Lamers, McCormick, Hilbert 2008). Soybean production is concentrated in the central provinces of Santa Fe, Buenos Aires, Entre Ríos and Córdoba (Figure 11 shows the soybean production area). The majority soybean processing industry is also located in this central region, which enables easy access to the Paraná River – a waterway with deep water suitable for large, export bound vessels. The 75 % of the installed capacity of the agrodiesel industry is concentrated in the province of Santa Fe and most of the exports go to the EU member states (Andreani 2008; CADER 2011).
13 Figure 11 Soybean production area and agri-industrial regionalization Source: Nardi et al . 2008 Some indicators of the agrofuel model Sustainability criteria The transformations in the last fourteen years are reflected in part, in the latest National Agricultural Census. This Census shows a significant increase in the scale of the average production unit compared to the values observed in the year 1988. At the aggregate level, it went from 424 ha in 1988 to 524 ha in 2002. In little more than a decade, the economic agriculture unit in the Pampas region increased by more than 100 acres (Chidiak & Stanley 2009).
Figure 12 Number of farms & land cost Source: INDEC
Overall, the 2008 National Census data allow us to make the following observations: • there has been a significant reduction in the number of agricultural farms, • there is a sharp increase in the average of the farm size; • the number of small farmers decreased strongly, • there was an increased in the land area devoted to agriculture;
14 • the cultivation of soybean increased significantly; • there was a significant reduction in land devoted to industrial crops (INDEC 2011).
Moreover there has been a qualitative change in the relationship between ownership and land control. A consequence of this is the disappearance of 20.8% of small farms with an increase of 20.4% of the average-size farm (Domínguez & Sabatino 2006). Food Sovereignty: The emergence of soybean as the main crop involved both the displacement of other crops and of livestock in existing agricultural areas, as well as the advance of the agricultural frontier into previously unexploited regions (Domínguez & Sabatino 2006). New social & environmental problems in rural areas: The growth of soybean cultivation is the pillar for the industrial agriculture model and is connected with a deep process of change in the agrarian social structure, marked mainly by the large number of small and middle producers that had to change from activity and forced to leave their farms (Domínguez & Sabatino 2006).
Production 20% 30% 50% 52 million tones
Farmers 78% 20% 2% 78.500 farmers
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Small farmers Mid farmers Big farmers
Figure 13 Soybean farmer’s productive structure Source: author, based on Lousteau 2008
Figure 13 shows the concentration of soybean production. In 2008, 50% of the soybean harvest was produced by just 2% of producers (Lousteau 2008). The intensification of agriculture has had negative environmental impacts. The agricultural expansion is a key driver of deforestation and habitat loss in Argentina since the late 19th century. In the past decade, technological advances combined with the high price of many agricultural products have intensified this situation. In addition, agricultural intensification has negative health impacts in rural communities. Crops are routinely sprayed with pesticides, from both the air and ground, within a short distance of local communities (Tomei & Upham 2009).
15 In Argentina, soybean advances at the expense of rural communities and other activities that are expelled from the countryside. The extension of the mono-crop of GM soybean brings risks: at an environmental level is threatening biodiversity and contaminating; at a commercial level the country becomes a mono-producer tied to the international price of the commodity; at a technological level it depends exclusively on the development of technology that generate multinational companies. This in turn implies an appropriation of the knowledge. But perhaps the greatest risk is the deepening of a new technological and productive agriculture paradigm that could be defined as industrial or agricultural without farmers (Dominguez & Sabatino 2006). Financial Capital in the Agricultural Production: One of the characteristics of the industrial farming model is that it consolidates the presence of financial capital flows in agriculture to direct their investments through seed pools or investment funds. The purpose of these is to ensure superior revenues to those provided in speculative activity. Generally, seed pools seek to maximize the use of the leased land and most of the time this implies an unsustainable use of it, which results in soil depletion (Dominguez & Sabatino 2006). Production orientated to external demand: Argentina has historically been characterized as an agricultural exporter. However, it used to keep a wide variety of crops, regarded as comparative advantages from each region. This not only allowed a diversified presence in the international market by expanding the ability to play against price fluctuation (Dominguez & Sabatino 2006).
Stakeholders Large transnational agri-businesses have played a key role in driving force of the new production model (Pérez 2007). There is an oligopoly industry structure; six biggest companies’ share 85% of the vegetable milling capacity. The companies are: Bunge Argentina SA, Cargill, Molinos Río SA, Luis Dreyfus, Vicentín, and Gral. Deheza, mainly centering on a large scale production of agrodiesel (based on soybean) for export, they are systematically located near big harbours. Six of them have plants to produce agrodiesel. Their lobbying power is mainly derived from their annual contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP) (Lamers, McCormick, Hilbert 2008). 15 Biotechnology multinational companies also play a primal role in the political economy of Argentina having a significant share to the capital accumulation strategies of Argentine through employment and taxation (Newell 2009).
15 Bayer CropScience, Dow AgroSciences, Nidera, Monsanto, Pioneer.
16
Figure 14 Map of Agrodiesel industries in Argentina and of the province of Santa Fe Source: The Argentine Renewable Energies Chamber (CADER)
Syngenta in few years became the world's largest agrochemical company, born from the joint- venture between Novartis and Astra-Zeneca. It is curious that they launched an advertisement with a map of a fictional "United Republic of Soybean", a territory covering large areas of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and the area of Santa Cruz, Bolivia, covered entirely by the cultivation of transgenic soybean. Soybean has no borders, said Syngenta, but the groups Environmentalists quickly called attention to the metaphor of a multinational brand borders a republic in the prevailing rules and laws, and the scandal was huge (Newell 2009).
Figure 15 Syngenta´s Advertisement “United Soybean Republic” Source: Agropecuario.org
17 Some of the agrofuel stakeholders
Stakeholders Stakeholder Leverage capacity Activity Government National Coordinates National Policy, promotes research, supports rural body for Biofuels development and encourages development in the sector promoting the Commission -efficacy debated use of agrofuels Providers of the Farmers Dispersed and divided by geography, scale of production and ideology. feedstock
AAPRESID(no-tillage technique), Networks ACSOJA, MAIZAR, CREA
Vegetable oil extraction CIARA Strong lobbying power industry chamber Sugar extraction FIAA Strong lobbying power association
Strong political influence National Strong link to the agricultural sector INTA Research Nationwide research institute providing technical assistance and support Institution for farmers, has an extensive research programme (among others) dedicate to agroenergy
National CONICET Research Strong political influence Institution National INTI Research Strong political influence Institution
Rural Reflection Little power in policy making Group (RRG, View: agrofuels will do nothing but accelerate the consolidation of the 2006, NGO agro-export model, a situation that is unacceptable to its members
- Against the expansion of the soybean industry, raise awareness of the impacts of agrochemicals on the health of their communities.
Repsol-YPF and Large petrol Show interest in the production of agrodiesel Petrobras company
Its main interests are: the Agrarian Reform, Biodiversity and Genetic Vía Global conservation of Resources, Food Sovereignty, Trade, Human Rights, Rural Campesina Organization Development, Rural Migration and Gender Equality.
Table 3 Some of agrofuel actors Source: Author based on Lamers 2006
18 III.Critical Discourse Analysis This chapter examines how discursive constructions from the hegemonic groups reinforced certain conceptions of development that maintained and legitimized the emergence of agrofuels. The analysis focus on the arguments use by the Government and the main social actors to justify agrofuel evolution from 2007 till 2010 and the impact this has in the public opinion. Eight governmental speeches and several newspapers articles have been chosen to highlight the different way to support the agri-business and agri-industrial model. Between the years 2007-2010 the hegemonic discourse on agrofuels is enhanced by different representations. In 2007 agrofuels were introduced as the most convenient (and sustainable) option and as a favorable environmental source of energy. This can be identified with the nodal point of the discourse that organizes all other elements. In addition it is connected to certain expectations of economic growth in Argentina. From 2008 the externalities of the production appear but the representations of agrofuels are still connected to the idea of wealth and welfare distribution. These ideas had been actively shaped with Government speeches, policies and media. From 2007, a political decision was taken in order to promote the development of agrofuels in Argentina. As stated before in the text, the 9 of February of 2007 the law for promotion of the 16 production and sustainable use of agrofuel was enforced. The Inaugural Government Conference on agrofuels was strategically linked to the idea of sustainability. The State would follow the market resolution of promoting agrofuels because this was seen as an opportunity for Argentina and as a driven force for development. The different spheres mentioned were: the spillover effect on the economy, the promotion of regional economies, the opportunity for investment, the diversification of the energy matrix and a new paradigm of wealth distribution joining the agricultural sector to the energy sector (De Vido et al 2007). The Minister of Economy Felisa Miceli expressed that the regulation of the agrofuel law presented a far-reaching milestone in the economic history of Argentina. The metaphorical construction she used worked as a vehicle for agrofuels to include social acceptance (De Vido et al 2007). However, the negative aspects, externalities or contradictory points of agrofuels were not mentioned. The major focus was connected to economic development, and all the positive spillover effects that this could produce. The benefits for the environment were never explicit, they just made a reference that they would work in projects to obtain carbon bonds to trade internationally and this could generate a number of advantages (De Vido et al, 2007) which were never explained.
16 A Conference was made by some members of the government to announce the scope of the regulation. The speakers were: the Federal Planning Minister Julio de Vido, the Economy Minister Felisa Miceli and the Energy Subsecretary Cristian Folgar. The discourse held by them was presented agrofuels as a means of achieving a positive vision of development.
19 These ideas were underpinned by Al Gore, who visited Argentina a couple of months after this announcement, on May 2007. The Nobel Peace Prize winner and world referent of global warming promoted investment on agrofuels in this country. This was one of a varied systematically ways of ordering meaning and knowledge concerning agrofuels. In his visit, Al Gore stated that this source of energy was a solution for climate change without harming the environment. Nevertheless, he 17 added that there was a possibility that deforestation and food prices could increase (Niebieskikwiat 2007). His double message was incompatible; how could an alternative source of energy be a good solution if it can produce deforestation (that is one of the big problems connected with global warming) and the increase on food prices (which affects directly the world ´s poorest people)? This discourse suggests that agrofuels are the vehicle for investment rather than constructing a solution for climate change. Some Media recognize the year 2007 as the beginning of the agroethanol cold war referring to two different positions about agrofuels. On one hand USA and Brazil leading the ethanol market due to their high share in the global market producing 70% of the global agroethanol, followed by Ecuador, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Argentina, Colombia and Uruguay. And, on the other hand: Cuba and Venezuela (Huergo, 2007). Several discourses appeared showing the different interests behind the groups. The message delivered by the Head of U.S. diplomacy for Southern Hemisphere was that agrofuels were to become a commodity and benefits connected with global warming should be obtained (Clarín 2007). 18 Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said that ethanol did not threaten the environment and food 19 production (Clarín 2007). Fidel Castro exposed that the huge amount of cereals oriented to agrofuels only served to save less than 15% of annual consumption of voracious cars of the rich 20 countries. Hugo Chavez supported Castro’s view, alleging the irrationality and unethical plan that it implied. Instead of using the good land left in southern countries for food production for humans it will feed cars in the north (Clarín 2007). However the following year in the World Summit on Food Security from FAO Lula denied the existence of a direct relationship between agrofuels and food prices. He said that he saw with indignation how oil and dirty coal fingers pointed against clean energy from agrofuels (Algañaraz 2008). 21 The year 2008 is crucial in Argentina politics; there is a shift in the hegemonic discourse. From this year onwards the discussion will be around the most convenient way to grow and how to
17 This is what actually happened 18 Brazil’s president 2003-2011 19 Cuba’s president 1976-2008 20 Venezuela’s president 1999-present 21 Technicians from Merrill Lynch started to refer to the neologism: Agflation as an economic concept that refers to the end of the cheap food and predicting that in 5-10 years food prices will double. The great paradox is that this happened when agricultural production doubled around the world, this is due to demand and supply. Higher incomes in China and
20 distribute the windfall obtained from soybean (main feedstock on the production of agrofuel). The central political dilemma was if the country should grow to distribute (more connected to the spillover effect) or distribute to grow. One year after the promotion for the sustainable production on agrofuels, environment and social externalities appeared in the official discourse but with a political objective: to increase the 22 tax exports . Some of the negative points highlighted by the Minister of Economy were; the dependence on the external markets, the worldwide phenomenon of food inflation (due to the 23 addition of millions of consumers and the spread of agrofuels), the displacement of many rural activities, the increase of the price of land in some areas due to soybean production, and the 24 decrease in marginal livestock and dairy production (Lousteau 2008). The tax exports were presented by the hegemonic discourse as the tool to maintain the equilibrium of domestic prices, and to encourage certain crops. Inequalities, distribution and wealth concentration were at all times in discourses. In addition, the President informed about the heterogeneity of the soybean producers, 20% produced 80% of the total tonnage of soybean and sunflower in Argentina, and from that 20%, 2.2% obtained 46% of production (Fernández de Kirchner 2008). The political arena was turbulent in the first semester of 2008. After the tax export resolutions there was a unified response of the people from the “countryside” turned against the Government. There were two specific speeches in the conflict period delivered by Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. 25 In one of them she tried to express her hegemony by dividing the society in two: the countryside, associated to a rich aristocracy, and the poor people. As an example she mentioned the 26 demonstrations in which the countryside took part and named them as the pickets of abundance , connecting them with the well-off sector (Fernández de Kirchner 2008). After her speech 27 demonstrations occurred in the most profitable parts of the whole country. 28 The President tried to counterbalance this manifestation changing the focus of the discussion, not only making reference to the concentration of wealth but explaining the externalities that arise
India increased the global consumption of meat, which in turn increased demand for cereals for livestock feed. The second structural change in demand for cereals has to do with the spread of agrofuels (Campanario 2008). In addition, the IMF and World Bank expressed concern over the crisis, which sparked riots in several countries. Since late 2006, prices rose 48%. It was the beginning of an outbreak of inflation (Baron 2008). 22 This refers to Resolutions: 125 and 126 which implied a sliding tax scheme for soybean, sunflower, corn and wheat and all byproducts for the following four years. 23 Countries as China and India have changed their diet 24 An agricultural strike began the following day of the tax exports´ announcement that generated a political conflict between the countryside and the Government. (Giarraca et al. 2008). 25 On 25th March, 2008. 26 The picketers are activists, who originally came from unemployed or workers movements, which are characterized mainly by roads or paths closures making difficult the circulation of these pathways. The word and the phenomenon is from Argentina. 27 In Argentina this kind of demonstrations are called cacerolazo referring to the slam of pans which hadn’t been heard since the big crisis of 2001. This was one of the most difficult situations the President went through. 28 A new speech on 31st March 2008.
21 with the soybean model. She stated that although the agricultural boom has created wealth, the country needed industry to add value. She explained that the former sector produced 21% of 29 unemployment and was much alike “The Little Model of 1910” (Fernández de Kirchner 2008). The environmental aspect also appeared in her speech when she referred to the 1,100 hectares of deforestation due to the soybean production and how these affected the biodiversity and climate 30 (Fernández de Kirchner 2008). Environmental issues gained importance once the tax exports were introduced but these facts were invisibilized before. There are big exporters, mills, grainers such as Cargill, Bunge Argentina, LCD Argentina, Aceitera General Deheza, Vicentín and Nidera that in 2007 exported 14 thousand million USD, 28,4 31 % of the total exports of the country . By not including them in the conflict scenario, the polarization of the society doesn’t really cover the real discussion of wealth concentration. The conflict neither refers to the exporters nor to the sowing pools. The discussions took in consideration the small and medium producers including the compensation system that was proposed. The political and economic context oriented them to a soybean production threatening food sovereignty (Giarraca 2008). In 2009, agroenergy implied a strategy for economic development, employment, State intervention, added value to the production (the industrialization of the country), wealth and 32 welfare distribution to all the provinces . The creation of the Federal Solidarity Found (Fondo Federal Solidario) is a key element to understand the different factors involved in connection with 33 distribution. The provinces would receive money from the tax export on soybean and this distribution would depend on the need of each province (not taking into account the province production). As the president expressed in her speech, it meant a redistribution of income in a 34 social and geographical (more than 11% of export income was sent to the provinces) way (Fernández de Kirchner 2009). 35 During the announcement of the creation of the National Agroenergy Headquarters in the 36 Province of Tucumán, the Governor expressed that this was an opportunity to promote development in his province (Fernández de Kirchner 2009).
29 Before the independence of Argentina a small sector concentrated great wealth, the country was the breadbasket of the world and at the same time there was a lot of poverty (Fernández de Kirchner 2008). 30 In the discourse delivered by President Cristina Fernandez, she underestimated the soybean by saying it was a weed (un yuyo in Spanish) that grew almost without special care. 31 These companies the main exporters and they are demanded by the Treasury for an evasion of 300 million unpaid tax exports. 32 A way to demonstrate that development of the country is also in the regional economies. 33 Previously the provinces were independent of their resources and they have to look for their own economic sustainability. 34 This decision was taken when the most powerful countries in the world suffered an economic crisis while Argentina had a trade surplus. (Fernández de Kirchner 2009). 35 It’s interesting to highlight that the headquarters are called of Agroenergy instead of Biofuels.
22 The Genren Program was introduced by the Energy Secretary Daniel Cameron. The objective of this Program is to replace by the year 2016 (Decree PEN N º 562), 8% of electricity consumption by renewable energy sources. The spotlight here is the economic and productive industrial development, the diversification of the energy matrix and investment. This measure would reduce large volumes of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere and it would generate employment (Cameron 2009). As from 2010, Cristina Fernández directed her attention to the distribution of income to provinces. She remarked that since 1983 there had never been a national administration that gave importance to this matter. She suggested that resources should be distributed directly to provinces and also through infrastructure plans, social plans, an increase in teachers' salaries and pensions and through the creation of universal child allocation (Fernández de Kirchner). The promotion for the development of agrofuels was also encouraged by Media. Hector Huergo, the Editor the agricultural section of the most widespread newspaper in Argentina (Clarín Rural) as well as the head of the Agrofuels Association, was accused of allowing RR soybeans and 37 glyphosate and therefore blamed by some qualified researchers (Verbitsky, 2009). Clarín Rural headlines embodied a particular discourse to create social acceptance on agrofuels through the use of rhetoric. In 2007, Clarin’s articles referred to agrofuels as the green gold. Farmers could become the major players in the new energy paradigm led by agrofuels (Clarín 2007). Several articles reinforced the social acceptance of agrofuels presenting an easier argument to understand, “they are neither good or bad, they are inevitable” (Huergo 2007), “they are the ideal substitute for gasoline and diesel because agrofuels require no major changes in engines and distribution infrastructure albeit they will definitely not solve the energy crisis or the global warming” (Huergo 2007), “it doesn’t matter whether agrofuels will solve global warming, what matters is that the market took agrofuel as a key figure in the equation that determines the price” (Huergo 2007), “The importance of agrofuels is based on a new grain demand” (Molina 2007). What is expressed here by is that agrofuels work for economic development, just as petrol does and that Global warming is just an excuse. Media plays a key role for setting the agenda for powerful groups. As it has already been mentioned, Clarín has been criticized because of its influence on public issues related to their corporate interests. Social scientists and experts have widespread their critical view on agrofuels challenging their social and environmental sustainability and emphasizing the externalities that arise with this
36 The previous year, when the Government regulated the production of agroethanol law and announced the launch of a series of incentives to promote investments by 500 million dollars in the Northwest and Northeast regions, the Governor of Tucumán said that for his province it was like discovering petroleum (Página 12, 2008). 37 In 1996 Argentina was the second country to authorize the RR soybean after United States in record time and without other evidence than those made by the company (Verbitsky, 2009).
23 production. They question the real effectiveness that the production has on climate change issues, the decrease in green house emission, deforestation, food sovereignty, biodiversity loss and the competition that appears between food and energy (Teubal 2009). The President of the National Institute of Industrial Technology INTI, Enrique Martínez stated that the poor were the most affected by the use of food to produce energy, especially maize. He added that the overall situation indicated a shift towards a model where the winners get more, and the losers lose more (Martínez 2007). In addition, the president of the Latin America Board of Social Sciences (CLACSO), Atilio Boron, declared that the assumption of a 'green and clean' fuel is a fallacy because agrofuels are ethically and politically unacceptable (Página 12, 2007). Furthermore the President of the National Institute of Agricultural Technology (INTA) Carlos Cheppi expressed that if all the cereals and oilseeds were set aside to produce energy, the former could replace about a third of current fuel consumption. He said that agrofuels were not an oil replacement option, but a complementary alternative that could contribute significantly to new global energy demand. Cheppi (2007) highlighted that agrofuels kept the current energy paradigm based on fossil fuels which had ruled for more than two centuries. A similar perspective was expressed by Jorge Adámoli, a professor of Ecology from the University of Buenos Aires and a CONICET investigator, emphasized the ethical conflict involved in the decision to use agricultural land for producing either food or fuel. He stated that environmental integrity and social equity should be prior to economic growth. Adámoli added that producing agrofuels to reduce emissions entails a vast deforestation with high benefits for big companies; however it has not been subject of discussion (Adámoli 2007). On the other hand the executive Director of the Association of Agrofuels and Hydrogen in Argentina expressed that world’s hunger had been a problem long before agrofuels existence, so they should be allowed to develop freely (Molina 2007). Other international opinions such as the European Environment Agency, blamed agrofuels for causing environmental, social and economic disasters (Idafe 2008). In addition, The Economic Nobel Prize, Joseph Stiglitz, expressed his concern on agrofuels. He added that the problem could be address with new patterns of consumption and production, i.e. a new economic model (Stiglitz 2008). The importance of this analysis relies on how the content and structure of discourses directly affect agrofuel practices and the externalities (social and environmental) produced. Discourses hide power and by the discursive dynamics we can have a better understanding about agrofuels evolution and the consequences entailed.
24 IV.Discussion and Conclusion This study shows that the emergence of agrofuels was from the beginning associated with the dependency on external markets, an agricultural activity with few farmers and an industrial process which is considered key for economic development. However, this also embodies a new way of social practice connected with a monopolistic market; few export industries and the know-how 38 concentrated in few companies . According to diverse opinions a wide range of actors contribute to build a positive image on agrofuels, promoting their acceptance in society accomplishing their personal interests. On the other hand, opposite perspectives coexist questioning the social acceptance and revealing the interests behind this renewable energy. The study also shows that soybean is the principal feedstock that sustained this agri-industrial development and for most of the people from the rural areas it was perceived as a national savior that helped Argentina to overcome one of the deepest financial crises in 2001. Consequently this model was underpinned through a particular set of discourses from the Government, Media and corporations proclaiming the benefits obtained and shaping actively new practices in the rural and social arena. In Argentina the rurality is part of the idiosyncrasy of their inhabitants. That is why the agri- business and agri-industrial model associated with agrofuels implies a cultural resonance to Argentinean identity. Rural matters along the history of the country have always had a privilege place on the political agenda. The methodological approach of the thesis suggests that discourses represent a systematic way of ordering meanings, practices and knowledge. The study shows that powerful groups control public discourse and therefore such discourses control mind and action of the less powerful groups. Therefore the coalition of discourses which shaped the agrofuel industry created new practices that changed the rurality of Argentina underestimating the negative consequences of the model. Thus, social and environmental externalities are the result of this control and how it is produce and reproduce. The illusion maintained with this renewable energy implies the idea that technological advances are the best path to follow and that productivity doesn’t consider biosphere boundaries. The multidisciplinary characteristic of this approach can raise critical awareness of what language can produce and in this sense, generate new questions that can foster new academic investigations. In addition a number of issues mentioned in the thesis need some further elaboration. More research and reflection on agrofuels are required for example in issues related to second generation agrofuels as well as investigating hegemonic discourses on other countries in
38 I specially refer to the biotechnological industry with their monopolistic markets of seeds and herbicides in this case.
25 South America to reveal how do multinational corporations work in a broader perspective. Another point to highlight is that I decided to choose a set of newspaper articles and discourses from 2007 till 2010; however it could be worthy to choose a larger time frame including for example more than a ten year period so discourses´ stability and shifts can be analyze considering long term trends. The agri-industrial model has been effective for the Government because the income derived from this sector helped to tackle poverty in the country due to its high share on the country’s GDP and its strategic role in the country’s export ranking. Revenues earned from taxes imposed on exports of GM soybean have been used to fund assistance programs. Social indexes have considerably improved as part of the spillover effects on Argentina economy, as it was shown previously the remarkable difference of social welfare during the last years. The spillover effect on the economy produced positive changes more connected to the idea of progress, economic growth and development. However the externalities affected the social and cultural structure of society in various ways, as well as the sustainable use of natural resources. Some of the visible consequences of this model were the concentration of land and the concomitant reduction of small farms, hence farmers were expelled from the countryside and had to migrate to the city loosing their identities connected with the countryside. Moreover, the increased price of soybean discouraged the production oriented for the domestic market. There have been deforestation of native forests, and loss of biodiversity and a stress of the dependency on external markets. Agrofuels reproduce the most dynamic relations of nowadays capital, which exists between transnational agri-business corporations and financial capital in the globalize world. That is why in analyzing the alignment of the hegemonic discourse, international companies and international financial institutions, we can see a productive and stable development paradigm between them. In particular, transnational companies such as the oil, biotech and agro-industrial which are the core drivers of agrofuels from growing corporate confluence. Also, a wide range of actors contribute to build a positive image of agrofuels, promoting their acceptance in society and, consequently, establishing business with them. What can be understood from this study is that the interest shown by governments -both national and provincial- on agrofuels lies ultimately not in the care of the environment, but rather to generate agri-industrial production centers that give added value to raw materials for export. So, the export of this alternative energy does not generate changes in existing patterns of accumulation of development strategies. Argentina has brought again to the public discussion the question of development: is it again an agro-export country that depends on the international demand? Or is it a development model that tries to promote an industry beyond the agriculture and tries to transfer the competitive
26 advantages through industrialization? There are two interconnected sectors that complement each other. However this discussion is beyond the idea of agrofuel connected with the green thought of building a most sustainable world. The way countries developed is directly connected to the way or the access they have to energy, and their energy/petrol consumption. But this is just inside the economic logic. How could a government think beyond this? As the production of agrofuels increases in Argentina and worldwide the discussions between food, environment, and agrofuels continues.
27 V. Bibliography - Andreani P, 2008, Mercado del complejo soja & análisis de la competitividad de los países exportadores, Programa de Inserción Agrícola -Asal S, Marcus R, Hilbert J, 2006, Opportunities for and obstacles to sustainable biodiesel production in Argentina, Energy for Sustainable Development, Volume X Nº 2 -Chidiak M, Stanley L, 2009, Tablero de comando para la promoción de los biocombustibles en Argentina, CEPAL - Colección de Documentos de proyectos, Publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas -Dominguez D, Sabatino P, 2006, Con la soja al cuello: crónica de un país hambriento productor de divisas, Los tormentos de la materia. Aportes para una ecología política latinoamericana. Alimonda, Héctor. CLACSO, Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales, Buenos Aires -Eide Asbjørn, 2008, The Right to Food and the Impact of Liquid Biofuels (Agrofuels), FAO, Rome -Escobar A, 1995,The Making and Unmaking of the Third World through Development in The Post Development Reader, 1997, Edited by Rahnema M & Bawtree V -Escobar J, Lora L, Venturini O , Yáñez E , Castillo E , Almazan O, 2009, Biofuels: Environment, technology and food security, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Nº 13, pp. 1275–1287 -Ewing M, Msangi S, 2008, Biofuels Production in developing countries: assessing tradeoffs in welfare and food security, Environmental Science & Policy 12 (2009) 520-528 -Faaij A, Londo M, 2010, A roadmap for biofuels in Europe, Biomass and Bioenergy, Volume 34, Issue 2, Pages 157-158 -FAO (Food and agriculture organization of the United Nations), 2008, The state of food and agriculture- Biofuels: prospects, risks and opportunities -Friman E, Gallardo Fernández G, 2010, Politicized Nature: Global Exchange, Resources and Power, Cefo Publication Series -Giarraca N, Teubal M, Palmisano T, 2008, Paro agrario: crónica de un conflicto alargado, Realidad Ecónomica Nº 237, pp. 33-54 -Gillen J & Petersen Alan, 2005, Discourse Analysis in Somekh B & Lewin C, Research Methods in the Social Sciences, Sage Publications, Great Britain -Hernádez Sobrino F, Rodríguez Monroy J, Hernández Pérez JL, 2010, Critical analysis on hydrogen as an alternative to fossil fuels and biofuels for vehicles in Europe, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Nº 14, pp. 772–780 -Hilbert J, 2007, El futuro del etanol en la Argentina, Comercio rural, N º 38 -Houtart F, 2009, Los agrocarburantes o la agroenergía, Ecuador Debate, N º 77 - Khanna M, Scheffran J, Zilberman D, 2010, Handbook of Bioenergy Economics and Policy, Springer, New York
28 -Kosacoff B, 2007, Crisis, recuperación y nuevos dilemas, CEPAL, Publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas -Lamers P, McCormick K, Hilbert J, 2008, The emerging liquid biofuel market in Argentina: Implications for domestic demand and international trade, Energy Policy 36, pp. 1479–1490 -Manuel-Navarrete D; Gallopín G; Blanco M; Díaz-Zorita M; Ferraro D; Herzer H; Laterra P; Morillo J; Murmis MR; Pengue W; Piñeiro M; Podestá G; Satorre EH; Torrent M; Torres F; Viglizzo E; Caputo MG; Celis A, 2005, Análisis sistémico de la agriculturización en la pampa húmeda argentina y sus consecuencias en regiones extra-pampeanas: sostenibilidad, brechas de conocimiento e integración de políticas, Serie Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo 118, CEPAL -Nardi MG; Carpio CE; Davis TD; Ward WA, 2008, Biodiesel Mandate Laws in Argentina and Brazil: An Estimation of Soybean Oil Foregone Export Revenues, paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meetings at Dallas, Texas, February 2-6, 2008 -Payne W, 2010, Are biofuels antiethic in the long-term sustainability of soil and water resources, Advances in agronomy, Volume 105 -Newell P, 2009, Bio-Hegemony: The Political Economy of Agricultural Biotechnology in Argentina, Journal of Latin America Studies N°41, pp 27–57, Cambridge University Press -Pérez P, 2007, Agronegocios y Empresas Transnacionales. Las implicancias de un modelo agrícola basado en el monocultivo de la soja transgénica, FOCO Foro ciudadano de participación por la justicia y los derechos humanos, Cuadernos de Investigación nº 4, Buenos Aires, Argentina -Pérez- Rincón M, 2008, Los agrocombustibles: ¿Sólo canto de sirenas? Análisis de los impactos ambientales y sociales para el caso colombiano. In: Censat, PCN (Ed.), Agrocombustibles: Llenando tanques, vaciando territorios, Colombia -Razo C, Astete-Miller S, Saucedo A, Ludeña C, 2007, Biocombustibles y su impacto potencial en la estructura agraria, precios y empleo en América Latina, CEPAL - Serie Desarrollo Productivo Nº 178, Publicación de las Naciones Unidas -Scheinkerman de Obschatko E & Begenisic F (ed), 2005, Perspectivas de los Biocombustibles en la Argentina y Brasil, SAGPyA - IICA -Schiffrin D, Tannen D & Hamilton HE, 2001, The handbook of discourse analysis, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford -Shafik A, Rémi M, 2006, Opportunities for and obstacles to sustainable biodiesel production in Argentina, Energy for Sustainable Development, Volume 10, N°2, pp 48 – 58 -Tirado M C, Cohen MJ, Aberman N, Meerman J, Thompson B, 2010, Addressing the challenges of climate change and biofuel production for food and nutrition security, Food Research International N° 43, pp.729–1744
29 -Tomei J, Upham P, 2009, Argentinean soybean-based biodiesel: An introduction to production and impacts, Energy Policy 37, pp. 3890–3898 -UN (United Nations), 2008, The Millenium Development Goals Report 2008 - Addressing the challenges of climate change and agrofuel production for food and nutrition security for vehicles in Europe” -Vicente C, 2008, Agrocombustibles en la mira de los fondos de inversión americanos: alimentando autos desde Wall Street, Ecología política, N º 36 Web references -Agropecuario.org 2011, http://www.agropecuaria.org/analisis/EviaRepublicaSoja.htm, viewed 25- 01-2011 -CADER, 2011, http://www.argentinarenovables.org/mapas.php, viewed 20-02-2011 - Ecología política, 2007, Agrocombustibles. Otro enfoque al debate sobre los Biocombustibles, Ecología política, N º 34, http://www.ecologiapolitica.info/ep/34.pdf, viewed 15-01-2011 -INDEC, 2010, http://www.indec.mecon.ar/principal.asp?id_tema=76, 2010, viewed 20-12-2010 -INDEC,2011, http://www.indec.mecon.ar/nuevaweb/cuadros/12/biocombustibles_02_11.pdf, viewed 10-03-2011 -INFOLEG, 2010, Resolución 828/2010, http://www.infoleg.gov.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/170000- 174999/171944/norma.htm, viewed 25-12-2010 -Ministerio de Economía Argentina, 2010 http://www.mecon.gov.ar/peconomica/basehome/infoeco.html, viewed 28-12-2010 - Secretary of Energy, Argentina State Planification Ministry, 2010, http://energia3.mecon.gov.ar/contenidos/verpagina.php?idpagina=3065, viewed 5- 12-2010 -SHATTUCK A, 2008, The Agrofuels Trojan Horse: Biotechnology and the Corporate Domination of Agriculture, Institute for Food and Development Policy, Policy Brief no. 14, http://www.foodfirst.org/en/node/2111, viewed 01- 02-2011 -SSIIA, 2010, http://www.siia.gov.ar/estimaciones_agricolas/01- semanal/_archivo/110000_2011/000100_Enero/110127%20Informe%20semanal%2027-Ene- 11.pdf, viewed 1- 12-2010 -UNFCCC, 2010, Kyoto Protocol, http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php, viewed 15-11- 2010 -UNFCCC, 2010, CDM, http://cdm.unfccc.int/about/index.html, viewed 15-11-2010 Discourses -De Vido J, Folgar C, Miceli F, 2007, February 2, Conferencia de prensa del Ministro Julio De Vido, la Ministra Felisa Miceli y el Subsecretario de Combustibles Cristian Folgar, Speech presented at Casa
30 Rosada, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina. http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2957&Itemid=71 -Martín Lousteau, 2008, March 3, Palabras del ministro de Economía y Producción, Martín Lousteau, Speech presented at Casa Rosada, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/index.php?id=1774&option=com_content&task=view -Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, 2008 March 25, Acto de firma de convenios entre AySA y municipios bonaerenses, Speech presented at Casa Rosada, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18 -Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, 2008 , Palabras de la Presidenta en acto anuncio de nuevas medidas para los pequeños y medianos productores agropecuarios, Speech presented at Casa Rosada, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1849&Itemid=66 -Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, 2009 March 19, Anuncian la creación de un Fondo Federal Solidario con lo recaudado por derechos de exportación de soja, Speech presented at Casa Rosada, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5703 -Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, 2009 May 5, Cristina Fernández presentó la Dirección Nacional de Agroenergía, Speech presented at Tucumán, Argentina http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5926 -Cameron D, 2009 May 20, Main points of the discourse delivered by the Energy Secretary Daniel Cameron presenting de Genren Program, Speech presented at Casa Rosada, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina http://energia3.mecon.gov.ar/contenidos/verpagina.php?idpagina=3065 -Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, 2010 August 18, Firma de convenios para el desendeudamiento de las provincias, Speech presented at Casa Rosada, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7528&Itemid=71 Newspaper articles -Adamoli J, 2007 March 10,Biocombustibles: sí, pero..., Clarín viewed 2-1 2011 from http://old.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/03/10/r-01377209.htm -Algañaraz J, 2008 June 5, Biocombustibles: la discusión copó la cumbre de los alimentos, Clarín, viewed 28-12-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/06/05/elmundo/i-01687313.htm -Algañaraz J, 2008 June 6, Disidencia argentina y caótico final en la cumbre de alimentos,Clarín, viewed 27-12- 2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/06/06/elmundo/i-02415.htm -Alimentos: la ONU pide más producción, 2008 June 7,Clarín, viewed 23-12-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2008/06/07/r-01688705.htm
31 -Baron A, 2008 April 10, Para el Banco Mundial, no sirven las retenciones, Clarín, viewed 22-12- 2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/04/10/elpais/p-00701.htm -Baron A, 2008 April 11, Alerta mundial por la dramática suba del precio de los alimentos, Clarín, viewed 26-12-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/04/11/elmundo/i-02615.htm -Benites J, 2007, April14, Tranqui, que hay para todos, Clarín, viewed 16-12-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/04/14/r-01399397.htm -Brunstein C, 2007, July 14, El responsable de la FAO en buenos aires hablo de comercio, biocombustibles y hambre, Clarín, viewed 1-15-2011 from http://old.clarin.com/diario/2007/07/14/elmundo/i-05003.htm -Campanario S, 2008 January 7,"Agflación": los economistas ven el fin de los alimentos baratos, Clarín, viewed 15-12-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/01/07/elpais/p-00402.htm -Cheppi C, 2007 June 2, La energía viene del campo, Clarín viewed 18-11-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/06/02/r-01430278.htm -Críticas al plan de biocombustibles, 2007 March 3, Clarín viewed 25-11-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/diario/2007/03/10/elpais/p-00701.htm -EE.UU. y Brasil anuncian un foro para impulsar el biocombustible, Clarín, viewed 25-11-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/diario/2007/03/03/elmundo/i-03401.htm -Fidel y Boron atacaron al biocombustible, 2007 May 11, Página 12, viewed 17-12-2010 from http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/4-84795-2007-05-11.html -Giarraca N, Teubal M, 2008 July 9, Agonegocios: ¿Transformación del modelo?, Página 12, viewed 3-12-2010 from http://www.pagina12.com.ar/imprimir/diario/elpais/subnotas/107481- -Henriques D, 2008 June 6, Los fondos de inversión van por las tierras agrícolas del mundo, Clarín, viewed 5-12-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/06/06/elpais/p-02201.htm -Huergo H, 2004 Novemeber 13, Los sojadependientes son ellos, Clarín, viewed 05-02-2011 from http://edant.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2004/11/13/r-00301.htm -Huergo H, 2007 April 10, No son ni buenos ni malos, sino inevitables, Clarín, viewed 15-02-2011 from http://old.clarin.com/diario/2007/04/10/opinion/o-02503.htm -Huergo H, 2007 March 3, Tratemos de ser objetivos, Clarín, viewed 10-10-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/03/10/r-01377165.htm -Huergo H, 2007 March 9, Biocombustibles: lo que hay que saber, Clarín, viewed 05-05-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/diario/2007/03/09/elmundo/i-02301.htm -Idafe M, 2008 April 12, Críticas en Europa a la apuesta por los biocombustibles, Clarín, viewed 28- 12-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/04/12/elmundo/i-03004.htm -La "guerra fría" por el etanol, 2007, April 4, Clarín, viewed December 5, 2010 from
32 La soja seguirá siendo un gran negocio, aunque se eleven las retenciones, 2008 March 27, Página 12, viewed 3-12- 2010 from http://old.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/04/07/r-01394965.htm -Machado L, 2007, March 31, La hora de los biocombustibles, Clarín, viewed 05-09-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/03/31/r-01390701.htm -Martinez E, 2007 April 15, “Esto perjudica a millones de pobres", Clarín, viewed 05-12-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/suplementos/economico/2007/04/15/n-01400049.htm -Molina C, 2007 March 24, El tema que todos quieren mirar, Clarín, viewed 2-11-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/03/24/r-01386282.htm -Molina C, 2007 October 20, El biodiésel llega con todo, Clarín, viewed 20-11-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/10/20/r-01522609.htm -Niebieskikwiat N, 2007 May 11, Llega Al Gore para promover inversiones en biocombustibles, Clarín, viewed 25-11-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/diario/2007/05/11/elpais/p-02201 -Niebieskikwiat N, 2007 May 12, Al Gore defendió los biocombustibles, pero también marcó sus riesgos, viewed 29-11-2010 from http://old.clarin.com/diario/2007/05/12/elpais/p-01801.htm -Para la OPEP, la especulación es la causa del petróleo caro,2008 June 1, Clarín, viewed 2-11-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/06/01/elmundo/i-01684548.htm -Persoglia S, 2007 November 13, El dulce sabor de los biocombustibles viewed 18-01-2011 from http://edant.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/10/13/r-01518138.htm -Póngale etanol de caña en el tanque, Página 12, 2008 November 14, viewed 12-3- 2010 from http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/economia/2-114999-2008-11-14.html -Qué hacer con la "ley Falcó", 2007 February 17, Clarín, viewed 12-11- 2010 from http://old.clarin.com/suplementos/rural/2007/02/17/r-01364853.htm -Stiglitz J, 2008 June 10, Repensar las fuentes del crecimiento, Clarín, viewed 28-11-2010 from http://edant.clarin.com/diario/2008/06/10/elmundo/i-01690631.htm -Teubal M, 2008 June 24, Debate sobre la renta de la tierra, Página 12, viewed 3-12-2010 from http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/1-106551-2008-06-24.html -Teubal M, 2009 May 5, El modelo sojero, Página 12, viewed on 01-12-2010 from http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/suplementos/cash/17-3885-2009-05-10.html -Verbitsky H, 2009 April 5, El predador, Página 12, viewed on 02-12-2010 from http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/subnotas/122647-39235-2009-04-05.html -Vía Campesina, 2008 March 27, Momento de meditación, Página 12, viewed 04-12-2010 from http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/economia/2-101380-2008-03-27.html
33