Biofuel transitions and global governance:

1

• Biofuel transitions and global governance
• lessons from Brazil
• Markku LehtonenSussex Energy GroupSPRU,
  University of Sussex

2
Outline

• Power centre-periphery perspective (theory)
• Power Brazil and bioethanol (practice)
• Conclusions centre-periphery and transitions in
  theory and practice

3
Why study Brazilian ethanol transition?

• Largest and oldest biofuel experiment
• Current internationalisation of biofuels
  governance
• Proalcool brought about a significant change in
  regime, but
• which regime?
• radical or incremental?
• sustainable or not?
• Power relations crucially shaped the evolution
  of the programme determine its sustainability

4
Why centre-periphery approach to power?

• Defining the regime centre and periphery
  instead of inside and outside
• Simple model, yet recognises many dimensions of
  power
• Highly unequal, archaic power structures in
  Brazil (intra and inter-regional)
• Shifts in regime centre-periphery
  internationally

5
Structure of imperialism (Galtung 1971)
Cc
Centre
Cp
Pc
Periphery
Harmony of interest
Pp
Disharmony of interest
6
Feudal centre-periphery structure (Galtung 1971)
P12
P11
C1
P21
P41
C2
C4
P22
P42
C3
P33
P31
P32
7
Dimensions of power

• Rank resource power
• Income, training, degree of organisation, type of
  work, geographical location
• Relations of interaction who wins who loses
  in the exchange?
• economic, political, military, communication,
  cultural and ideological exchange
• Structures of interaction position in networks
• Communication, transport, etc. networks
• Sum of relations of interaction

8
Brazil at the launching of Proalcool (1975)

• Oil and sugar crises
• Car industry Brazilian economic miracle
  legitimacy of military government at stake
• Ethanol as a niche in transport fuel supply
  regime at least since the 30s symbiotic
  relationship between regime and niche
• NE leading sugar producer until the early 50s
  from then on, inexorable advancement of São Paulo
• Centre-periphery relationship between SP and NE
  in all sectors

9
Phases of Proalcool programme
10
Levels of C-P relations

• Transport fuel supply regime
• Centre oil-based regime
• Periphery ethanol
• Sugar and alcohol sector
• Centre São Paulo
• Periphery Northeast
• International biofuel regime?

11
Power relations in the transport fuel supply
regime (I)
Petrobras Car industry Economy and planning
min. Army
Cc
Cp
SP sugar and alcohol industrialists IAA Distillery
manufacturers
Car owners (Cm) Env authorities
Pc
NE sugar alcohol sector
Harmony of interest
Pp
Disharmony of interest
12
Power relations in the transport fuel supply
regime (II)

• Rise of the ethanol niche integral part of the
  regime
• Early phases central roles of Petrobras,
  car-owning middle class, NE sugar lobby -gt
  military governments power (dependency on strong
  lobbies power and support)
• Winners 1986 - SP industrialists, economic
  env authorities, RD institutes, MoST
• Accelerated decline of NE since 1986, but
  differences between dimensions of power

13
Power relations in the sugar and alcohol sector
(I)
Sugar alcohol industrialists Copersucar Distill
ery manufacturing
SP
Cc
Cp
Sugaralcohol industrialists Inependent cane
growers (Pm) IAA
Independent cane growers (Cm) Farm and factory
workers CETESB
NE
Pc
Farm factory workers Regional env authority
Harmony of interest
Pp
Disharmony of interest
14
Power relations in the sugar and alcohol sector
(II)

• Centres in both SP and NE benefited from
  Proalcool
• Centre of Periphery (NE) suffered 1986-2003
  future?
• Ambiguous impacts on the peripheries (workers)
  employment yes, but working conditions?
• Consolidation of the centre-periphery structure,
  first through state subsidies, then with subsidy
  removal?
• Demand up since 2003 impacts on C-P relations?

15
Conclusions theory

• C-P illustrative in analysing sugar and alcohol
  sector more questionable with regard to
  transport fuel regime
• Allows analysing the multiple layers of power
  relations between and within regime niches
• Coordinated vs. uncoordinated regime responses
  contested visions, framings and SD definitions
  C-P relations help to explain?
• Competition or cooperation between niches
  (periphery-periphery)? Bioethanol, biodiesel,
  natural gas?
• C-P as analogy, rather than a theory of
  niche-regime relationships

16
Conclusions sustainability and biofuels
governance

• Transition or not? Radical or incremental?
• Importance of ideological, cultural aspects of
  power military sovereignty, liberalism,
  modernisation private car, environment
• Interaction between forms of power
• What happens in the NE when biofuels governance
  goes global?
• NGOs and Western governments power?
• Role of the Brazilian state?
• Ways of breaking the unequal power structures
  Galtung, transition theory
• Empowerment transition management where by
  whom?

17
US and EU governments Oil companies Biotech firms
Global energy/biofuel regime
Envirosoc NGOs
Car-owners
Petrobras Car industry Military Energy
ministry Econ authorities Proalc admin
Sugar/alcohol regime
Farmer lobbies
Transport fuel regime
Car-owning middle class Enviro authorities
Sugar industrialists
Labourers
Sugar barons
NE
SP
Labourers
18
Future of global biofuels and Brazil

• Sustainability transition or not? Regime
  definition and criteria of assessment
• Power
• Centre-periphery framework can be helpful in
  conceptualising power in socio-technical
  transitions, but problems Centre-periphery
  niche-regime?
• Global biofuels governance
• Need to look beyond GHG and ecological impacts
• Accountability structures certification?
• Who is to participate in the definition of
  criteria of certification/assessment?
• Can the purposive transition of the 70s be
  repeated and replicated, to help reach climate
  objectives?

19
Sugar in the Northeast of Brazil

• Sugar cultivated in the NE since the mid-1500s
• Quasi-feudal worker-employer relationships
• Technologically backward
• Regional local politics dominated by sugar
  barons
• Among the poorest regions of the country
  provider of cheap labour and resources to the
  wealthy Southeast