Research

Food and Energy Nexus Action Research Project:  First steps of and emerging process

These pages are part of a process to document and develop the food and energy nexus inquiry. They are far from complete and are emerging. But as the inquiry develops, the context and our positions will emerge reflecting the perspectives from the grass roots.

The pages contains:

• Background information on climate change and agro-fuels that are required to contextualize the case studies;
• A reflections from the case studies that provided the basis to develop the research inquiry further;
• An account of two case studies where agro-fuels are being cultivated.

1 – Background information for case studies

Man-made elevations of atmospheric carbon dioxide are causing global warming, often referred to as climate change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007 concluded that man-made climate change could alter the delicate balance of the earth, causing further climate chaos and destruction, with the poor (mainly women and children) affected disproportionately (Christian Aid, 2006; Christian Aid, 2007; UNICEF, 2007; Lawson, 2008; Kutsch M, 2002). Therefore, developing strategies and solutions to climate change has become on of the biggest challenges of the 21st century.

International scientific solutions to climate change have been framed around mitigation and adaptation.  One such solution to mitigate against elevating carbon dioxide levels are biofuels. Biofuels are promoted as a renewable energy, reducing dependence on environmentally destructive petrochemical as a means to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.  In India, policy makers and advocates of biofuels also purport rural development and energy security as part of the biofuels promise (Altenburg, 2008).

A number of studies have been conducted evaluating the claims around biofuels mitigating elevated carbon dioxide. Two recent studies have indicated that biofuels creates a ‘carbon debt’ through land-use changes, for example, converting rainforests, peatlands, savannas or grasslands to produce biofuels. The carbon dioxide levels released through land use change could be greater than continuing with fossil fuel consumption (Fargione et al., 2008; Searchinger et al., 2008)

The social impacts of biofuels have also been studied, highlighting both positive and negative aspects (Altenburg, 2008; Cotula et al., 2008; FAO, 2008; Bailey, 2008). It has been reported that in developing countries, biofuels are potentially beneficial for poor people as sales from the cash crops could increase their purchasing power, and thereby reduce the risk of malnutrition and starvation (Bailey, 2008; Cotula et al., 2008). Oxfam research suggests that biofuels could also provide clean renewable energy for many poor men and women in rural areas (Bailey, 2008).

Potential negative attributes of biofuels came to a head in the recent food crisis in 2007-2008. The food crisis was stimulated by a rapid and sharp rise in the price of food in developing countries. Many poor people, who spend 50-80% of their income on purchasing food, could not afford the inflated prices of food.

Biofuels, among other factors, were a key driver for food prices increase, as stated by the IMF, World Bank and Food Policy Research Institute. This marks an influential convergence between food and energy that undermined food security for poor people. People being displaced from their lands, land concentrations in the hands of the few, reducing biodiversity, land grabs by business/government for large-scale plantations, undermined food and land sovereignty for poor people, and dependency on the vulnerable markets are among the negative reported impacts of biofuels (Shiva 2009; FIAN, 2008; GRAIN, 2007; GRAIN, 2008; Hansen-Kuhn, 2008; Rights and Resources, 2008; Anthra 2008; Asher 2008).

The controversies and differences in opinion around biofuels have led many actors to call for a moratorium on biofuels (see: http://www.econexus.info/biofuels; Indian biofuels network) Furthermore, the very notion of biofuels has come under scrutiny and some actors prefer agro-fuels as it represents the industrial approach to biofuels and highlights the divergence of agriculture from food to fuel. The controversies and differences in opinion on agro-fuels as a sustainable solution to climate change, energy security and rural development, clearly requires critical investigation from several different angles and positions.

The Food Energy Nexus Inquiry will build on the bourgeoning levels of critical evidence on agro-fuels. This study, using participatory action research principles, will critically investigate agro-fuels expansions in rural Andhra Pradesh, India. The inquiry will also prioritize work with excluded communities, such as dalits and adivasis’ to ensure that a) traditionally marginalized and excluded voices are actively included and b) to understand better the links between climate change, agro-fuels and marginalization and c) to work at the grassroots to generate people-led change in response to the food and energy nexus.

Over the next 1-3 years the Food Energy Nexus Inquiry will attempt to document a series of case studies.

2 – An emerging action research process: Drawing from preliminary case studies and developing the inquiry

A participatory action research approach is being developed for the Food-Energy Nexus Inquiry over the next 1-3 years in India. The inquiry is prioritizing working with marginalized communities, such as the adivasi and dalits. It is important therefore to ensure that the history and long struggle that dalits and adivasis have endured is honored and recognized throughout the research process.

A core component of the process is to develop space where communities can engage with the debates around agro-fuels, share their unique perspective and to develop research questions and actions according to their experiences and pressing needs. Nalgonda and Chapanguda Village marks the first case studies of the research process; preliminary steps of a deeper and longer process.  Although definitive conclusions cannot be drawn so early in the research process a number of reflections have tentatively been drawn around the convergence of food and energy.

Although brief, these case study challenges the scientific and social development paradigm driving the pro agro-fuels agenda. More time is required, however, to deepen understanding, hear perspectives, narratives and potential actions around agro-fuels. It is important therefore to gain a broader appraisal on how agro-fuels expansion is affecting the lowered castes, women, children and young people, and poor in Andhra Pradesh. How agro-fuels disaggregates on the basis of gender and age in this and further case studies requires careful attention and will be actively sought and developed in the future.

The initial case studies have identified that a range of critical issues, concerns and questions around agrofuel plantations that emerged through community-based discussions. Some are based on the views and perspectives of the communities involved within the research process and some are my personal reflections. These perspectives will shape then next stage of the action research process and aid in developing a deeper understanding and appropriate village-led responses to the food and energy convergence.

The reflections below will form the basis of the next steps of the Inquiry.

2.1 – Agro-fuels and the potential to undermine livelihoods and land/food sovereignty

People in power and society more generally have oppressed dalits for many years in Indian. This intolerable level of discrimination that dalits are subjected to has led to radical resistant movements, and institutional reform strategies, especial around land. An important part of land struggles was to ensure that dalits gained entitlement to land and hence acquired land sovereignty, a sustainable livelihood and cultivated much needed dignity to an oppressed group of people.

It has emerged though this case study that agro-fuels planted on dalit land have undermined land/food sovereignty, dignified livelihoods and arguably negated arduous but necessary land struggle/entitlement strategies and movements. This organically leads to the question: Are agro-fuels undermining dalit struggles of resistance against discrimination widespread and common? And this question will shape this inquiry throughout.

Agro-fuels is stimulating land-use changes and displacement in Nalgonda. Shepard’s that once grazed on land where agro-fuels are now have been displaced, forced to travel to graze their flocks. How far the shepherds have to travel to graze is unknown and would make a useful line of inquiry.

The displacement from the land raises important questions. Are agro-fuels displacing people from their land and livelihoods widespread? Will agro-fuels contribute to distress-led migration from rural areas to urban centers? What are the impacts on dalits and the poor when they are displaced from their land? What are the gender/children impacts of land displacement from agro-fuels? What other climate change policies have undermined the livelihood of the poor?

2.2 – Agro-fuels: The lack of inclusive and democratic processes?

To our knowledge there is no documentation on an agro-fuels community consultation process. It is impossible to assess therefore, if balanced and well-informed evidence on the pros and cons of agro-fuel plantations were presented to villagers’.

It is tempting to speculate if only the ‘positive’ aspects of agro-fuels are presented to marginalized communities then it creates a positive and enabling environment for agro-fuels. Hence, many villages might feel favorable to agro-fuels or in other words the pro-agro-fuels lobby ‘manufactures consent’. This inquiry will investigate and document this pressing issue further.

What is clear however, if agro-fuels are to be pursued by government, business and international agencies then land is required. Land is central to agro-fuels expansion. If advocates of agro-fuels wish to procure land from rural regions in India then there should be a robust process in place to ensure land rights are not undermined by agro-fuels. A process that provides a safe, non-corrupt, democratic space should be provided that allows people in the locality affected to critically deliberate on the positive and negative aspects of potential agro-fuel plantations in their region.

Currently there is little evidence to suggest that agro-fuels expansion in India is conducted via inclusive democratic means that withstand the test of independent critical scrutiny. Community voice, that of women, marginalized groups, children and young adults should all be part of a process that critically inquire on the positive and negative aspects before agro-fuels plantations commence in their locality.

This begs the question: Would communities in rural/forest regions consent to agro-fuels plantations if a fully democratized and inclusive regional participatory appraisal approach, such as a Citizens Jury, were in place? Form the villagers’ feedback it seems that if a Citizens Jury were to be conducted today then agro-fuels would be out-rightly rejected.

2.3 – Does the Science around agro-fuels match the reality on the ground?

The promise and predictions made by governmental officials around agro-fuels yields and irrigation requirements did not reflect the reality on the ground. Agro-fuels yield were much lower and water irrigation required was much more intensive, contrary to earlier predictions.

The science of agro-fuels in the laboratory from initial case studies did not match the reality in the village field. These initial findings suggest that the science behind the agro-fuels is uncertain and therefore indicates that further scientific predictions were made on agro-fuels should be treated with caution and evaluated rigorously. The food energy nexus research process will follow this line of inquiry further.

2.4 – Does Agro-fuels knowledge creation integrate with the tacit knowledge of poor women and men from specific geo-political landscapes?

Knowledge creation of agro-fuels is frequently generated in centralized scientific/policy institutes divorced from perspectives and realities of women, farmers and marginalized communities. Epistemologically – the generation of knowledge itself, in this case science – is failing poor farmers and communities at the two sites. It is failing in two aspects, one, the scientific characterization of ‘wastelands’ and two, on the predictions of agro-fuels yields and irrigation required. It was evident that the dalit farmers obtained many uses from the so called ‘waste lands’ such as food, livelihoods, and even income from renting the land to shepherds for grazing.

Knowledge (and policy positions) is incomplete and partial if seen through the lens of science and policy-makers alone. The reality of agro-fuels as highlighted in Nalgonda and Chalpanguda is linked to specific geo-political ethno-ecological systems. For example, pongamia yields were not estimated by considering the conditions of the soil, rain patterns, and more generally the ethno-ecological system of the specific landscape. The science-led predictions around agro-fuels, it appears, are not based on the specific conditions but on non-specific field trials or laboratory tests. Is this type of scientific practice common where agro-fuels are cultivated?

2.5 Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Energy?

Scientific knowledge is driving the technological development of agro-fuels globally. Hence it is scientific knowledge that is driving agro-fuels plantations to meet rural, national and global energy needs in a climate change era. Furthermore, a proportion of rural energy needs in India will be serviced via agro-fuel plantations. It is therefore tempting to speculate that there is a belief by policy makers that science-led knowledge can provide a proportion of rural energy needs.

The Indigenous Knowledge Systems around meeting local energy needs in rural areas, to our knowledge, however, have yet to be explored or consider as a viable alternative to that of scientific knowledge. This case study in adivasi region indicates that Indigenous Knowledge Systems in meeting rural energy needs have not been actively pursued.

It is worth mentioning that over recent years Indigenous Knowledge Systems have in fact been marginalized by scientific knowledge systems across the globe. Indigenous Knowledge Systems should be actively explored as it could potentially provide more viable and appropriate energy generation in rural and forest regions than agro-fuels. Or way in which IKS and scientific knowledge can integrate to provide local energy requirements will also be explored through this inquiry.

2.6 – Rural employment and agro-fuels

The villagers in Nalgonda and Chalpanguda believed that unemployment had increased over recent years due to technological developments. One of the factors driving agro-fuels is the promise of rural employment for poor people. Agro-fuels plantations in Nalgonda did indeed fulfill on this promise through the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS)

However, NREGS would have been provided irrespectively of agro-fuels plantations. The villagers were also critical of NREGS being used to support agro-fuels rather than aiding village development, such as strengthening water resources and improving soil fertility.

Furthermore, it is tempting to speculate that NREG is being used as an instrument to facilitate the implementation of agro-fuels and provide plentiful cheap non-unionized labor? This begs the questions: Should NREGS be utilized for agro-fuels plantations? Is NREGS another form of subsidizes for agro-fuels plantations? How do people in other villages feel about NREGS being directed towards agro-fuels plantations?

Further case studies on this issue are required to assess better the relationship between agro-fuels and NREGS.

2.7 – The impacts of agro-fuels on gender and children/young people are unclear

The research was short in duration and the methodology relied on a short village meeting. The narratives generated through the meeting shaped the analysis but future research will require greater attention participatory action research approaches. Furthermore, although the main analyses in this case study were from women it is still difficult to understand the gender impact of agro-fuels and hence it is unequivocally important that future research focuses on gender dimensions.

How agro-fuels impacts disaggregate across age will also be pursed. For example, are young people considering pursing agriculture of agro-fuels? Or is migration or other factors influencing the considerations for young people in adivasi forest or rural regions?

3 – Introduction to Case Studies

Out of 4 potential case studies two have been developed further for the food-energy nexus inquiry. The villagers in the two regions have direct experiences in cultivating agro-fuels. The two case studies are expanded upon below:

3.1 – Nalgonda case study

Nalgonda district is a semi-arid and drought prone region of Telengana, Andhra Pradesh. Nalgonda has become political important over the years arguable by two factors. Nalgonda has been a hotbed for activists due to the uranium mining that the Indian government is planning. And Nalgonda, over the years, has witnessed sporadic Naxalite activities, accentuating political and media interest in the region.

Anthra has established partnerships with a range of NGOs in the Nalgonda district, who are working closely with communities. Teryala village consists of landowners, farmers, landless laborers, Shepherds’ and resources such as water sources, common and private land. This case study, using participatory action research principles, documents the villager’s experiences with agro-fuels and possible villager-led actions .

3 – Introduction to Case Studies

Out of 4 potential case studies two have been developed further for the food-energy nexus inquiry. The villagers in the two regions have direct experiences in cultivating agro-fuels. The two case studies are expanded upon below:

3.1.2. – The villagers’ articulate their experiences around the land and the move to cultivating agro-fuels

After an organized land struggle in the late 1980’s to early 1990’s coupled with government initiatives landless dalits now have entitlement to the land. There are 40 acres of land, currently each of the 40 dalit households have entitlements to one acre of land.

The land was used for millet cultivation for local consumption. Due to rainfall variations, increases in temperature, and drought farmers have stopped cultivating crops due to these pressing challenges. Villagers’ believe that temperatures have increased by 4 or 5 degrees and further exacerbates the drought-prone region hence cultivation of crops is extremely difficult. Consequently dalit householders leased the land to Shepard communities for grazing their sheep and goats, generating an income of 5000 rupees per annum.

Three years ago the government officials targeted the village for agro-fuels developments. Many of the villagers’ discussed that the government officials were instrumental in communicating a positive agro-fuels scenario for the village, by highlighting attractive subsidies, that National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS ) would supply labor to cultivate the plantations, and potential economic gains.

Considering the above the villagers sacrificed food crops and income from the land for grazing and shifted the land-use to pongamia plantations.

3.1.3 – Villagers’ perspective around growing agro-fuels

The villagers’ discussed and shared experiences around cultivating agro-fuels.

The lack of availability and/or displacement of shepherds from grazing lands due to agro-fuels plantations were discussed at length. Many of the villagers believe that agro-fuels undermine access to grazing lands and raised these issues as a serious concern.

One women participant also highlighted the benefits of being part of the agro-fuels initiative. She articulated that through participating in the agro-fuels development provided some women (including herself) with an ‘official and credible identity’ and hence made it easier to access bank loans.

A lack of yields and stunted/slow growth of pongamia was a key theme that emerged through the discussion. The villages indicated that government officials predicted high yields did not reflect the reality in the fields where pongamia growth was stunted or failed to germinate. Furthermore, larger amounts of water were required to irrigate pongamia plantations than estimated by governmental officials. Conflicting agro-fuel realities led to discussion that worried the villagers’ greatly: how could such low yields have any commercial value, as estimated by the government?

Furthermore, the discussion also highlighted the critical issue around seed rights; it is was far from clear who possessed the rights over the seeds. It was still unknown who actually owned the seeds, the farmers or the government/business. The lack of seed sovereignty and unpredictable yields highlights how farmers cultivating pongamia feel vulnerable as food/seed and land sovereignty were all undermined by agro-fuels plantation.

A short extract of the discussions are given below.

Male participant

“One government and industrial agent has come to the village and had a small meeting with the village/farmers…[and asked us] who is interested in 100% subsidies in pongamia and in yields in 5 years times at 25 kg?  First year of seed – 10 rupees per kg”?

Male participant

“Huge subsidies – 40 farmers were mobilized. This land was for millet, red gram, jowar; sometimes there was crop failure and therefore farmers were tempted by subsidies. In this context and because we would get 5 years of investment – we thought we would go for it. However, the plantation mortality is high, many plants  have died. Plants and land have died”.

Male participant:

“Animals graze on the land but now we don’t allow animals to graze on the land as it may destroy the saplings. 40 acres have been used for pongamia – this is the third year of sapling growth [reference to stunted growth of pongamia] . They said that in 5 years that there would be seed  yields”.

Women participant:

“By the second year – we knew it would take longer to get a yield. Who will buy the seeds now?”

Women participant:

“[If] land is used for pongamia [then we] will get a credit reference and record – and  be recorded in the official system, and  we will have an identity – which means we can get a loan”.

Group Discussion:

All this [pongamia plantations] and agricultural activities are supported by the NREGS but there is lots of corruption in this scheme. They work for 20 hours but claim for 100 – farmers don’t get the benefit. But organizers of the NREGS do, by showing higher figures in their  ‘muster roler’  – there is lots of corruption. Lots of people, farmers, and owners of the land don’t get benefit. After 3 years, there is not more than 10% survival rate. I’m in a dilemma – it [the land] used to be for millet, now should I leave it fallow? Who will help? There is 10% survival rate; Should we  plough land like we used to, and prepare it to plant millets?

We can’t destroy pongamia because it is the government’s. We need some help on this.

We were told that we would get 20 thousand rupees per acre – it has been over three years now and we have received no rupee at all. Who will give the money? Were these false calculations? False assumptions? Who should we blame? Government has taken land and is now blaming others for crop failure.

Biodisel for one acre was to have yielded  15-20 quintals of seed, but when we see the reality…..

They say it will take some more time, it will take  more than 5 years…..who will buy and at what price?

“In 5 years we get the seeds but who owns the seeds – who has the seed rights? Nobody knows about the seed rights.”

3.1.4 – Agro-fuels or village-led development?

The villagers’ discussed the important need for village-led development. For example, the NREGS should aid village-led development rather than support agro-fuels plantations. The villagers’ discussed and aired their views around strengthening water resources, improving soil fertility and general land development.

Critically, the villagers also raised strong concerns around demand. The demand for agro-fuels was not local; the demand was from external (national and international) forces on the village. The agro-fuels produce (if there are yields) would be exported from the village to as yet an unknown destination. In fact, the main form of transport in the village was walking (mainly women) and cycling (mainly men); ironically, 13 cycles were present at the agro-fuels discussion.

Short extracts of the discussion are given below:

We don’t want plantations….. people want NREGS!  But government is linking NREGS payments with planting biodiesel.  The government is not promoting useful work in the village. Government supports the biodiesel in the village – NREGS used in this way is a false idea, it is not working. Don’t come to our land.

People looking for jobs has increased. Technology has come into the village. Before, on average, 15 people were working on the land. Now only 1 or 2 men, 1 driver, one helper. Earlier, without technology, people could get grain from working on the field, weeding, harvesting. When technology came they lost there jobs. This is the pressure on the government – so grow pongamia. This [NREGS] scheme is the problem.

First they said that each person will have 100 days of work. But now they look at the family level, so there is  100  days between husband and wife. Each day 100 rupees. But 100 days of work is shared by me and my wife. How do we survive? What are we to do? We are looking for help? We are looking for guidance.

We need water -  we have water -  can you strengthen [our current water resources] instead of supporting stupid plants?  Please strengthen the ponds.

The watershed projects should be used for pond restoration to allow us to grow food, developing fodder for livelihoods for our survival.

We have no money from biodiesel. This is for the benefit of other people, not for our stomachs.

The NABARD (National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development)  supports the watershed programme in the village. If you could try and think about our village development, natural resources, and water. NREG and watersheds give us an opportunity to develop water and land resources. So far we have been growing biodiesel through NREGS but NREGS should support soil fertility and land development and restoration of water bodies.  They have ignored all this and it is pushing for biodiesel. In the NREGS policy/programmes they do not mention biodiesel.

3.1.5 – Villagers to use local democracy – the Gram Sabha – to arrive at a collective decision to reject agro-fuels

It was clear from the discussion that the villagers were critical about the government-purported benefits of cultivating agro-fuels. The reality of cultivating agro-fuels was far from positive. The villagers were keen to extend the discussion to more formal spaces where clear decision around the expansion and development of agro-fuels in the village could be evaluated. Therefore, at the next appropriate gram sabha (local government), deliberations on agro-fuels will be on the agenda. The villagers felt that they would halt further expansion of agro-fuels in the village and return to more traditional ways of working with the land.

A short extract of the group discussion is given below:

Gram sabha – in that meeting we will take the decision about no more agro-fuels in our village. The plants have a  10% survival rate – . We will no longer use land for biodisel. We would like to keep land for livestock and food crops for our food security. At the Gram sabha we will take this decision.

In the village context the reality is that biodiesel is a huge activity. In this context we are refusing biodiesel. We should strictly follow rules of the watershed programme around meaningful interventions in the village. At the Gram sabha we will discuss  rejecting biodiesel.

3.2 – Chalpanguda village case study

Chalpanguda village is situated in Tiryani Mandal of the Adilabad district, Andhra Pradesh, India. Chalpanguda village is predominantly populated by adivasis’, such as the gonds and kolams, the indigenous people of India. The village comprises of 60 house-holds and is located adjacent to the forests. The Chalpanguda village and the Adilabad district were targeted by the Andhra Pradesh (AP) state to improve the welfare of advasi communities. IFAD and the governments of India and the Netherlands supported AP in their endeavors.

In 1991 IFAD provided $20 million, the government of India, $19.5 million and the Netherlands $7 million to the Andhra Pradesh State for their Department of Adivasi Welfare. The money would support the Andhra Pradesh Adivasi Development Project. This project focused on increasing food security through green revolution techniques/ideologues, increasing income thorough stimulating the development of cash crop cultivation, and to propagate agro-fuel plantations for community assets and rural electrification. Despite the huge amounts of resources invested in the advasi welfare project many social activists, such as an NGO specifically working with adivasi communities, Yakshi, were highly critical of neo-liberal agenda that drove this project forward.

Many years after the IFAD-backed project a small team from the Food-Energy Nexus project visited the region and initiated a meeting with an advasi community group.  We meet in a confident woman’s house, in the outdoor area under shade next to the satellite dish; sharing the space with chickens, a bull, a guard dog, and a number of children. The woman is the head in the panchayats and she works with 16 villages (see: http://www.flickr.com/photos/food-energy-nexus/). She hosts the meeting.

3.2.1 – Agriculture and entitlement to forestland are core to advasi village life

A range of issues was discussed in Telugu and the local tribal language (Gondi). Of particular concern were the National Rural Guarantee Employment Scheme (NRGES) has yet to allocate a wage for the 100 days of work undertaken by villagers’ in the forest region. This has caused considerable distress. Health wise, fevers are one of the main diseases with no government facilities near-by; the hospital is 12km away.

Agriculture is a way of life for the villagers – cotton, maize, sorghum, pulses and castor oil are grown. People have started to buy seeds through the market, especially sorghum. The livestock composition is 40% goat, and 40 bullocks have also been distributed to 20 women for lands they cultivated in ‘forest regions’. 60% of the villagers don’t have land entitlements, which they are eligible for. However under the Forest Rights Act people have filed for their claims. Many have also taken to bank loans for agricultural purposes and for general living costs.

This year the female farmer used 3 acres of land for cotton – she used three packets of seeds. I bag of seeds is 400 rupees, she used 3 bags and no pesticides. Her total cost were 3700 rupees.  She yielded 1 quintan at the price of 3000 rupees, hence a loss of 700 rupees. She also has one acre of land for food pulses and sorghum.

She will now have to develop a wage to make ends meet, and is hopeful that NRGES will help. This year she is just going to grow food crops. However, food crops are a lot of labor, because of potential crop loses through predators such as birds, and wild bors’. Therefore, lots of time is required, for example, someone has to be present at the crop all the time.

3.2.2 – Agriculture and climate change: an insecure village environment

The villagers have regularly experienced erratic rains. Tragically, the harvest season began and coincided with heavy rain, resulting in many crops losses. It appears that the consequents of climate change, through erratic rain patterns, are negatively impacting on the villagers’ livelihoods. Temperature increases have also been reported. The villagers’ were clear that if the erratic rains continue then they will have to find a solution together or they will leave this village. So far, however, no one has migrated due climate-stress.

3.2.3 – Pongamia yields are much lower than predicted and hold no economic or environmental value to the village community

The IFAD project focusing on adivasi development stimulated agricultural change from indigenous agro-ecological systems to green revolution approaches and initiated agro-fuels (pongamia plantations). The pongamia plantations were initiated to provide the community with assets, to fertilizer the soil (pongamia fixes nitrogen in the soil) and to generate income through biodiesel sales to service rural electrification for a near-by village.

The villagers’, mainly women, have been growing pongamia for ten years. The feedback from the community was overwhelmingly negative. The main area of concern was the unsatisfactory yields of pongamia. The villagers’ were under the impression that diesel would be produced, which could be sold for rural electrification to a near-by village but predicted yields failed to materialize. The villagers’ were not sure why pongamia did not grow to that of estimated yields. Throughout the discussion the villagers’ were united in their analysis – they would not be growing pongamia again and they feel that they can’t get cheated anymore.

The villagers’ have reported that there are training schemes via NRGES to grow pongamia near housel-holds and near roads, and wastelands. This needs to be followed up and monitored.

After an organized land struggle in the late 1980’s to early 1990’s coupled with government initiatives landless dalits now have entitlement to the land. There are 40 acres of land, currently each of the 40 dalit households have entitlements to one acre of land.

The land was used for millet cultivation for local consumption. Due to rainfall variations, increases in temperature, and drought farmers have stopped cultivating crops due to these pressing challenges. Villagers’ believe that temperatures have increased by 4 or 5 degrees and further exacerbates the drought-prone region hence cultivation of crops is extremely difficult. Consequently dalit householders leased the land to Shepard communities for grazing their sheep and goats, generating an income of 5000 rupees per annum.

Three years ago the government officials targeted the village for agro-fuels developments. Many of the villagers’ discussed that the government officials were instrumental in communicating a positive agro-fuels scenario for the village, by highlighting attractive subsidies, that National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS ) would supply labor to cultivate the plantations, and potential economic gains.

Considering the above the villagers sacrificed food crops and income from the land for grazing and shifted the land-use to pongamia plantations.

3.1.3 – Villagers’ perspective around growing agro-fuels

The villagers’ discussed and shared experiences around cultivating agro-fuels.

The lack of availability and/or displacement of shepherds from grazing lands due to agro-fuels plantations were discussed at length. Many of the villagers believe that agro-fuels undermine access to grazing lands and raised these issues as a serious concern.

One women participant also highlighted the benefits of being part of the agro-fuels initiative. She articulated that through participating in the agro-fuels development provided some women (including herself) with an ‘official and credible identity’ and hence made it easier to access bank loans.

A lack of yields and stunted/slow growth of pongamia was a key theme that emerged through the discussion. The villages indicated that government officials predicted high yields did not reflect the reality in the fields where pongamia growth was stunted or failed to germinate. Furthermore, larger amounts of water were required to irrigate pongamia plantations than estimated by governmental officials. Conflicting agro-fuel realities led to discussion that worried the villagers’ greatly: how could such low yields have any commercial value, as estimated by the government?

Furthermore, the discussion also highlighted the critical issue around seed rights; it is was far from clear who possessed the rights over the seeds. It was still unknown who actually owned the seeds, the farmers or the government/business. The lack of seed sovereignty and unpredictable yields highlights how farmers cultivating pongamia feel vulnerable as food/seed and land sovereignty were all undermined by agro-fuels plantation.

A short extract of the discussions are given below.

Male participant

“One government and industrial agent has come to the village and had a small meeting with the village/farmers…[and asked us] who is interested in 100% subsidies in pongamia and in yields in 5 years times at 25 kg?  First year of seed – 10 rupees per kg”?

Male participant

“Huge subsidies – 40 farmers were mobilized. This land was for millet, red gram, jowar; sometimes there was crop failure and therefore farmers were tempted by subsidies. In this context and because we would get 5 years of investment – we thought we would go for it. However, the plantation mortality is high, many plants  have died. Plants and land have died”.

Male participant:

“Animals graze on the land but now we don’t allow animals to graze on the land as it may destroy the saplings. 40 acres have been used for pongamia – this is the third year of sapling growth [reference to stunted growth of pongamia] . They said that in 5 years that there would be seed  yields”.

Women participant:

“By the second year – we knew it would take longer to get a yield. Who will buy the seeds now?”

Women participant:

“[If] land is used for pongamia [then we] will get a credit reference and record – and  be recorded in the official system, and  we will have an identity – which means we can get a loan”.

Group Discussion:

All this [pongamia plantations] and agricultural activities are supported by the NREGS but there is lots of corruption in this scheme. They work for 20 hours but claim for 100 – farmers don’t get the benefit. But organizers of the NREGS do, by showing higher figures in their  ‘muster roler’  – there is lots of corruption. Lots of people, farmers, and owners of the land don’t get benefit. After 3 years, there is not more than 10% survival rate. I’m in a dilemma – it [the land] used to be for millet, now should I leave it fallow? Who will help? There is 10% survival rate; Should we  plough land like we used to, and prepare it to plant millets?

We can’t destroy pongamia because it is the government’s. We need some help on this.

We were told that we would get 20 thousand rupees per acre – it has been over three years now and we have received no rupee at all. Who will give the money? Were these false calculations? False assumptions? Who should we blame? Government has taken land and is now blaming others for crop failure.

Biodisel for one acre was to have yielded  15-20 quintals of seed, but when we see the reality…..

They say it will take some more time, it will take  more than 5 years…..who will buy and at what price?

“In 5 years we get the seeds but who owns the seeds – who has the seed rights? Nobody knows about the seed rights.”

3.1.4 – Agro-fuels or village-led development?

The villagers’ discussed the important need for village-led development. For example, the NREGS should aid village-led development rather than support agro-fuels plantations. The villagers’ discussed and aired their views around strengthening water resources, improving soil fertility and general land development.

Critically, the villagers also raised strong concerns around demand. The demand for agro-fuels was not local; the demand was from external (national and international) forces on the village. The agro-fuels produce (if there are yields) would be exported from the village to as yet an unknown destination. In fact, the main form of transport in the village was walking (mainly women) and cycling (mainly men); ironically, 13 cycles were present at the agro-fuels discussion.

Short extracts of the discussion are given below:

We don’t want plantations….. people want NREGS!  But government is linking NREGS payments with planting biodiesel.  The government is not promoting useful work in the village. Government supports the biodiesel in the village – NREGS used in this way is a false idea, it is not working. Don’t come to our land.

People looking for jobs has increased. Technology has come into the village. Before, on average, 15 people were working on the land. Now only 1 or 2 men, 1 driver, one helper. Earlier, without technology, people could get grain from working on the field, weeding, harvesting. When technology came they lost there jobs. This is the pressure on the government – so grow pongamia. This [NREGS] scheme is the problem.

First they said that each person will have 100 days of work. But now they look at the family level, so there is  100  days between husband and wife. Each day 100 rupees. But 100 days of work is shared by me and my wife. How do we survive? What are we to do? We are looking for help? We are looking for guidance.

We need water -  we have water -  can you strengthen [our current water resources] instead of supporting stupid plants?  Please strengthen the ponds.

The watershed projects should be used for pond restoration to allow us to grow food, developing fodder for livelihoods for our survival.

We have no money from biodiesel. This is for the benefit of other people, not for our stomachs.

The NABARD (National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development)  supports the watershed programme in the village. If you could try and think about our village development, natural resources, and water. NREG and watersheds give us an opportunity to develop water and land resources. So far we have been growing biodiesel through NREGS but NREGS should support soil fertility and land development and restoration of water bodies.  They have ignored all this and it is pushing for biodiesel. In the NREGS policy/programmes they do not mention biodiesel.

3.1.5 – Villagers to use local democracy – the Gram Sabha – to arrive at a collective decision to reject agro-fuels

It was clear from the discussion that the villagers were critical about the government-purported benefits of cultivating agro-fuels. The reality of cultivating agro-fuels was far from positive. The villagers were keen to extend the discussion to more formal spaces where clear decision around the expansion and development of agro-fuels in the village could be evaluated. Therefore, at the next appropriate gram sabha (local government), deliberations on agro-fuels will be on the agenda. The villagers felt that they would halt further expansion of agro-fuels in the village and return to more traditional ways of working with the land.

A short extract of the group discussion is given below:

Gram sabha – in that meeting we will take the decision about no more agro-fuels in our village. The plants have a  10% survival rate – . We will no longer use land for biodisel. We would like to keep land for livestock and food crops for our food security. At the Gram sabha we will take this decision.

In the village context the reality is that biodiesel is a huge activity. In this context we are refusing biodiesel. We should strictly follow rules of the watershed programme around meaningful interventions in the village. At the Gram sabha we will discuss  rejecting biodiesel.

3.2 – Chalpanguda village case study

Chalpanguda village is situated in Tiryani Mandal of the Adilabad district, Andhra Pradesh, India. Chalpanguda village is predominantly populated by adivasis’, such as the gonds and kolams, the indigenous people of India. The village comprises of 60 house-holds and is located adjacent to the forests. The Chalpanguda village and the Adilabad district were targeted by the Andhra Pradesh (AP) state to improve the welfare of advasi communities. IFAD and the governments of India and the Netherlands supported AP in their endeavors.

In 1991 IFAD provided $20 million, the government of India, $19.5 million and the Netherlands $7 million to the Andhra Pradesh State for their Department of Adivasi Welfare. The money would support the Andhra Pradesh Adivasi Development Project. This project focused on increasing food security through green revolution techniques/ideologues, increasing income thorough stimulating the development of cash crop cultivation, and to propagate agro-fuel plantations for community assets and rural electrification. Despite the huge amounts of resources invested in the advasi welfare project many social activists, such as an NGO specifically working with adivasi communities, Yakshi, were highly critical of neo-liberal agenda that drove this project forward.

Many years after the IFAD-backed project a small team from the Food-Energy Nexus project visited the region and initiated a meeting with an advasi community group.  We meet in a confident woman’s house, in the outdoor area under shade next to the satellite dish; sharing the space with chickens, a bull, a guard dog, and a number of children. The woman is the head in the panchayats and she works with 16 villages (see: http://www.flickr.com/photos/food-energy-nexus/). She hosts the meeting.

3.2.1 – Agriculture and entitlement to forestland are core to advasi village life

A range of issues was discussed in Telugu and the local tribal language (Gondi). Of particular concern were the National Rural Guarantee Employment Scheme (NRGES) has yet to allocate a wage for the 100 days of work undertaken by villagers’ in the forest region. This has caused considerable distress. Health wise, fevers are one of the main diseases with no government facilities near-by; the hospital is 12km away.

Agriculture is a way of life for the villagers – cotton, maize, sorghum, pulses and castor oil are grown. People have started to buy seeds through the market, especially sorghum. The livestock composition is 40% goat, and 40 bullocks have also been distributed to 20 women for lands they cultivated in ‘forest regions’. 60% of the villagers don’t have land entitlements, which they are eligible for. However under the Forest Rights Act people have filed for their claims. Many have also taken to bank loans for agricultural purposes and for general living costs.

This year the female farmer used 3 acres of land for cotton – she used three packets of seeds. I bag of seeds is 400 rupees, she used 3 bags and no pesticides. Her total cost were 3700 rupees.  She yielded 1 quintan at the price of 3000 rupees, hence a loss of 700 rupees. She also has one acre of land for food pulses and sorghum.

She will now have to develop a wage to make ends meet, and is hopeful that NRGES will help. This year she is just going to grow food crops. However, food crops are a lot of labor, because of potential crop loses through predators such as birds, and wild bors’. Therefore, lots of time is required, for example, someone has to be present at the crop all the time.

3.2.2 – Agriculture and climate change: an insecure village environment

The villagers have regularly experienced erratic rains. Tragically, the harvest season began and coincided with heavy rain, resulting in many crops losses. It appears that the consequents of climate change, through erratic rain patterns, are negatively impacting on the villagers’ livelihoods. Temperature increases have also been reported. The villagers’ were clear that if the erratic rains continue then they will have to find a solution together or they will leave this village. So far, however, no one has migrated due climate-stress.

3.2.3 – Pongamia yields are much lower than predicted and hold no economic or environmental value to the village community

The IFAD project focusing on adivasi development stimulated agricultural change from indigenous agro-ecological systems to green revolution approaches and initiated agro-fuels (pongamia plantations). The pongamia plantations were initiated to provide the community with assets, to fertilizer the soil (pongamia fixes nitrogen in the soil) and to generate income through biodiesel sales to service rural electrification for a near-by village.

The villagers’, mainly women, have been growing pongamia for ten years. The feedback from the community was overwhelmingly negative. The main area of concern was the unsatisfactory yields of pongamia. The villagers’ were under the impression that diesel would be produced, which could be sold for rural electrification to a near-by village but predicted yields failed to materialize. The villagers’ were not sure why pongamia did not grow to that of estimated yields. Throughout the discussion the villagers’ were united in their analysis – they would not be growing pongamia again and they feel that they can’t get cheated anymore.

The villagers’ have reported that there are training schemes via NRGES to grow pongamia near housel-holds and near roads, and wastelands. This needs to be followed up and monitored.