Assumptions in the European Union biofuels policy: frictions with experiences in Germany, Brazil and Mozambique.

Jennifer Franco, Les Levidow, David Fig, Lucia Goldfarb, Mireille Hönicke, Maria Luisa Mendonça
{"title":"Assumptions in the European Union biofuels policy: frictions with experiences in Germany, Brazil and Mozambique.","authors":"Jennifer Franco,&nbsp;Les Levidow,&nbsp;David Fig,&nbsp;Lucia Goldfarb,&nbsp;Mireille Hönicke,&nbsp;Maria Luisa Mendonça","doi":"10.1080/03066150.2010.512454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The biofuel project is an agro-industrial development and politically contested policy process where governments increasingly become global actors. European Union (EU) biofuels policy rests upon arguments about societal benefits of three main kinds - namely, environmental protection (especially greenhouse gas savings), energy security and rural development, especially in the global South. Each argument involves optimistic assumptions about what the putative benefits mean and how they can be fulfilled. After examining those assumptions, we compare them with experiences in three countries - Germany, Brazil and Mozambique - which have various links to each other and to the EU through biofuels. In those case studies, there are fundamental contradictions between EU policy assumptions and practices in the real world, involving frictional encounters among biofuel promoters as well as with people adversely affected. Such contradictions may intensify with the future rise of biofuels and so warrant systematic attention.</p>","PeriodicalId":506321,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Peasant Studies","volume":"37 4","pages":"661-98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03066150.2010.512454","citationCount":"184","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Peasant Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2010.512454","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 184

Abstract

The biofuel project is an agro-industrial development and politically contested policy process where governments increasingly become global actors. European Union (EU) biofuels policy rests upon arguments about societal benefits of three main kinds - namely, environmental protection (especially greenhouse gas savings), energy security and rural development, especially in the global South. Each argument involves optimistic assumptions about what the putative benefits mean and how they can be fulfilled. After examining those assumptions, we compare them with experiences in three countries - Germany, Brazil and Mozambique - which have various links to each other and to the EU through biofuels. In those case studies, there are fundamental contradictions between EU policy assumptions and practices in the real world, involving frictional encounters among biofuel promoters as well as with people adversely affected. Such contradictions may intensify with the future rise of biofuels and so warrant systematic attention.

欧盟生物燃料政策的假设:与德国、巴西和莫桑比克经验的摩擦。
生物燃料项目是一个农业工业发展和政治上有争议的政策过程,各国政府日益成为全球行动者。欧盟(EU)的生物燃料政策建立在关于三种主要社会效益的争论之上——即环境保护(尤其是温室气体减排)、能源安全和农村发展,特别是在全球南方国家。每一种观点都涉及对假定的好处意味着什么以及如何实现这些好处的乐观假设。在检验了这些假设之后,我们将它们与三个国家的经验进行了比较——德国、巴西和莫桑比克——这三个国家通过生物燃料相互之间以及与欧盟之间有着各种各样的联系。在这些案例研究中,欧盟的政策假设和现实世界的实践之间存在着根本的矛盾,包括生物燃料促进者之间的摩擦以及受到不利影响的人们。这种矛盾可能会随着未来生物燃料的兴起而加剧,因此需要系统的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信