Africa is crucial for Brazil to exercise leadership in biofuels, study concludes

Changes in foreign and economic policy alongside adverse shifts in global geopolitics have eroded Brazil's capacity to achieve the aims of "ethanol diplomacy", say Brazilian and British researchers.

By Elton Alisson  |  Agência FAPESP – Biofuels still represent an opportunity for Brazil to exercise its capacity for global leadership in the field of renewable energy, but it should partner with Africa in order to increase the scale of production and trade in ethanol from sugarcane. First, however, it must surmount the obstacles to the implementation of a clean energy policy.

Changes in Brazil’s foreign policy in recent years, with Africa ceasing to be a priority, together with decisions on fuel price controls and decreasing international oil prices, have reduced Brazil’s capacity to achieve the aims of its “ethanol diplomacy”, which is shorthand for the policy to promote the global production of biofuels, especially bioethanol, implemented during President Lula’s first term (2003-06) and practically abandoned in 2009 after production began from newly discovered giant oilfields in ultradeep (“presalt”) waters off the Southeast coast. 

This view is expressed in an article by researchers affiliated with the National Institute of Science and Technology of Bioethanol (INCT Bioetanol) – one of the INCTs supported by FAPESP and the National Council for Scientific & Technological Development (CNPq) – and the Center of Biological and Industrial Processes for Biofuels (CeProBIO), also supported by FAPESP, in collaboration with colleagues at the University of Leeds and University College London in the UK. The article was published in the journal Global Environmental Politics.

“Toward the end of President Fernando Henrique Cardoso’s second term [1999-2002] and at the start of Lula’s first term, there was an intensification of diplomatic and economic relations between Brazil and African countries, but they cooled noticeably during President Dilma Rousseff’s first term [2011-14],” said Marcos Buckeridge, who heads INCT Bioetanol and is also a researcher at CeProBIO, in an interview given to Agência FAPESP.

“The changes in the direction of Brazilian foreign policy, including the virtual abandonment of relations with Africa, followed by the economic crisis and the decision to place all bets on petroleum with the discovery of the presalt oilfields, pushed aside the pursuit of ethanol diplomacy.”

The article notes that Brazil has a long tradition in biofuels based on the production of first-generation ethanol using sugarcane as feedstock, and over time, it has built up substantial expertise in breeding improvements to this crop and in bioethanol production technology.

For many years, Brazil sought to leverage this expertise through ethanol diplomacy involving technical knowledge transfer, exchanges of best practices, and private-sector investment.

Becoming a world leader in bioenergy and creating a global market for biofuel production and consumption were key political goals for Brazilian policymakers in the periods mentioned earlier.

“The African continent is vital to achieve the goals to which ethanol diplomacy aspires because of its favorable climate and agricultural conditions and the availability of land on which to grow sugarcane,” Buckeridge said.

“Replicating its ethanol production model in African savannas, for example, would enable Brazil to demonstrate leadership and increase its visibility by positioning itself strategically in an emerging global market and creating opportunities for expansion of the bioenergy sector.”

Change of plan

In light of Africa’s crucial role, Brazil strove to establish a number of bilateral partnerships with African nations in the early years of the century as well as trilateral arrangements involving the European Union and the United States.

Biofuel production deals were signed during the Lula administration with Egypt, Sudan, Liberia, Kenya, Angola, Zimbabwe and South Africa as well as Malawi, where biofuel production has reportedly advanced the most.

However, Brazil’s sugar and ethanol industry lost competitiveness due to several years of drought combined with the global financial crisis that broke out in 2008 and the Dilma Rousseff administration’s price controls, which were designed to control inflation by capping gasoline and diesel prices and by cutting the tax on petroleum products but not on ethanol.

“Brazil’s ethanol diplomacy has been impacted by this domestic standstill,” and African countries’ enthusiasm for biofuels has also waned, according to the authors of the article, which describes the findings of a survey based on interviews with dozens of Brazilian, African and EU stakeholders.

“When the shift from ethanol to oil began in Brazil, especially after the discovery of the presalt oilfields, the Africans became distrustful and began to look for new partners, such as the EU,” Buckeridge said.

Outlook

“Brazil remains a leader in biofuels and has immense potential to exercise global leadership in this arena, but its leadership is threatened by domestic problems,” he added.

According to the article, Brazil has the material and scientific resources to be a global leader in the biofuel arena, but the domestic situation and budget constraints have limited the ability of public- and private-sector actors to engage in biofuel-related activities abroad. Its attempt to exert global leadership has also been impaired by a significant change in international perceptions of biofuels and the dynamics of the global economy.

“For Brazil to achieve its global leadership goal in the biofuels arena, a vital first step will be the reconsolidation of a domestic vision. Doing so will enable Brazil to take advantage of technological innovations in advanced biofuels that could change the tide with respect to biofuels on the international scene”, the article concludes.

“Unpacking Brazil’s leadership in the global biofuels arena: Brazilian ethanol diplomacy in Africa” (doi: 10.1162/GLEP_a_00369) by Buckeridge et al. can be read in Global Environmental Politics at mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/GLEP_a_00369#.WGvoI9IrIdU.