Women
the most impacted by agrofuel production
The expansion of large-scale plantations
--either crops or trees-- for the production of liquid agrofuels
such as bioethanol and biodiesel is increasing in many Southern
countries –with harmful impacts on people and the environment.
Now, even the FAO admits the risks.
A recently published FAO report looks into agrofuel production
and their gendered impacts, explaining that it may increase the
marginalization of women in rural areas, threatening their livelihoods.
The large-scale pattern of agrofuel
feedstocks conveys increased land requirements that put pressure
on so-called “marginal” lands, which provide key subsistence functions
to the rural poor and are frequently farmed by women. The report
acknowledges that replacement of local crops with monoculture
energy crop plantations could threaten agro-biodiversity as well
as the extensive knowledge and the traditional skills of smallholder
farmers in the management, selection and storage of local crops,
all activities performed mainly by women.
In addition, agrofuel production may
negatively impact the livestock sector, which is key to the food
security of rural households, through a reduction in the availability
of land for grazing and an increase in the price of fodder (due
to the growing use of agricultural commodities for agrofuel
production).
The potential depletion or degradation
of natural resources associated with large-scale plantations for
agrofuel production may place an
additional burden on rural farmers’ work and health, in particular
on female farmers. If agrofuel production competes, either directly
or indirectly, for water and firewood supplies, it could make
such resources less readily available for household use. This
would force women, who are traditionally responsible, in most
developing countries, for collecting water and firewood, to travel
longer distances thus reducing the time available to earn income
from other sources.
The potential loss of both biodiversity
and agro-biodiversity presents risks to food production as well,
posing a serious threat to rural livelihoods and long-term food
security. In particular, the potential deforestation associated
with the establishment of large-scale plantations for agrofuel
production may negatively impact the peoples who depend on such
forests for their livelihoods, increasing their food insecurity.
Agrofuel
production might also have gender-differentiated impacts on food
access, through both price and income effects. There is growing
evidence that the increasing demand for agricultural commodities
for the production of liquid agrofuels is
contributing to reverse the decrease in the price of both agricultural
commodities and food that has occurred in the last few decades.
This may have negative food security impacts, particularly for
households that are net purchasers as well as countries that are
net importers of agricultural commodities and food. The
rising demand for liquid agrofuels could
also make the prices of agricultural commodities and food more
unstable, exposing a significant number of households and individuals
to the risk of food insecurity. Sudden increases in food prices
would have negative repercussions in particular for poor households
and vulnerable groups, particularly women and female-headed households,
which tend to be particularly exposed to chronic and transitory
food insecurity, due also to their limited access to income-generating
activities.
Furthermore, the alleged employment
opportunities in rural areas of the establishment of plantations
for agrofuel production are targeted mainly to low-skilled agricultural
workers and these are rather seasonal jobs or on a casual basis.
FAO reports that a growing number of these workers are women,
who due to existing social inequalities generally tend to be disadvantaged,
compared to men, in terms of employment benefits and exposure
to occupational safety and health risks.
In general, the cultivation of sugarcane
and oil palm has been linked, in several Southern countries, to
unfair conditions of employment, health and safety risks, child
labour and forced labour. In some cases, working conditions on
plantations (including those of agrofuel
feedstocks) tend to have a differentiated gender impact. Landowners
tend to prefer women workers, as they are able to pay them less
than their male counterparts and find them a docile and dependent
workforce, and are therefore more exploitable.
Reliable data on the share of women
waged agricultural workers are difficult to obtain, given the
prevalence of informal labour arrangements. There is evidence,
however, that this share has been rising worldwide and women now
account for 20-30 percent of total waged agricultural workers.
In Latin America and the Caribbean, the figure is 40 percent,
while, in African countries, this percentage is likely to be higher.
There is evidence that women tend to receive on average less training
and instruction than men, they often do repetitive work that can
result in health problems, and face reproductive hazards as a
result of exposure to agrochemicals. In Malaysia, for instance,
women, who represent about half the workforce on plantations,
are often recruited as sprayers of chemical pesticides and herbicides,
without proper training and safety equipment. This may have serious
implications for the long-term health of these women workers.
The FAO report concludes that efforts
to mitigate climate change through the promotion of liquid agrofuels
production can reduce people’s socio-economic resilience
(especially among the most vulnerable groups, including women),
weakening their ability to cope with exogenous shocks such as
climate change.
However, FAO fails to take a committed
stance against the agrofuels model being promoted, which is unsustainable
by its own nature, and ends with the wishful thinking that “making
sure that biofuels production is beneficial to both men and women
in developing countries would therefore strengthen their ability
to cope with the impacts of climate change”.
We welcome the information provided
by the FAO report, though we feel that its final conclusion doesn’t
hold water. Agrofuels are increasingly proving that they bring
no environmental or social benefits, and the FAO report depicts
how they affect especially poor and rural women. The conclusion
should therefore be strong and clear: if you want to benefit poor
and rural women, do not promote agrofuels!
Excerpted, adapted and commented from:
“Gender And Equity Issues In Liquid Biofuels Production Minimizing
The Risks To Maximize The Opportunities”, Andrea Rossi and Yianna
Lambrou, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, Rome, 2008, ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/ai503e/ai503e00.pdf