Heinrich B - indiaenvironmentportalAbout Heinrich Boell Foundation Heinrich-Boell-Foundation (HBF)...

Heinrich BÖll FoundationIndia Office AddressC-20, First Floor, Qutub Institutional Area,New Delhi - 110 016INDIATel : 0091 11 26854405, 2651 6695Fax : 0091 11 26962840Email: [email protected]://www.boell-india.org

FIAN InternationalPO Box 10 22 4369012 HeidelbergGermanyTel : 0049 6221 6530030,Fax: 0049 6221 830545,Email: [email protected]://www.fian.org

FIAN West Bengal195 Jodhpur ParkKolkata - 700 068West BengalIndiaTel: 0091 33 24128426, 24732740Fax : 0091 33 24725571Email: [email protected]://www.fianwb.org

Imprint:

Edited by Ujjaini Halim, Barbara Meincke and Sabine Pabst with inputs from SwatiAgrawal, Shantiranjan Behera, Nidhi Rani, Madhabi Roy, and Parama Chatterjee (Ukil).

Cover Photo:Satish Lele, April 6th, 2006, India’s Bio Diesell Scene. Available athttp://www.ecoworld.com/category/energy/index.php?page=20

Published by FIAN West Bengal

Publishing date: November 30, 2008

Produced with financial assistance from Heinrich BÖll Foundation

FUELLING POVERTY?

AN AGRO-FUEL GUIDELINE FOR INDIA

FIAN and HBF India

About Heinrich Boell Foundation

Heinrich-Boell-Foundation (HBF) is a non-profit political foundation affiliated to the Ger-man political party of Alliance 90/The Greens. Since 2002 the Heinrich-Boell-Foundationhas an office in Delhi and co-operates with Indian partners. Its focal areas of concern inIndia are Climate and Energy; Democracy and Conflicts as well as Gender and Trade.The foundation’s primary objective is to support political education, thus promoting demo-cratic involvement, socio-political activism, and cross-cultural understanding. HBF alsoprovides support for art and culture, science and research, and developmental co-opera-tion. Its activities are guided by the fundamental political values of ecology, democracy,solidarity and non-violence.

About FIAN

FIAN International, the FoodFirst Information and Action Network, was founded in 1986. Itwas the first international human rights organization to advocate the realisation of theright to food, as laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and otherinternational human rights instruments. FIAN consists of national sections present in Africa,Asia, Latin America and Europe. Its individual members come from over 50 countries. FIANis a not-for-profit organization without any religious or political affiliation and has consultativestatus with the United Nations.

FIAN’s mission is to expose violations of people’s right to food wherever they may occur.FIAN stands up against unjust and oppressive practices that prevent people from feedingthemselves. The struggle against gender discrimination and other forms of exclusion isintegral part of FIAN’s mission in its strive to secure people’s access to the resources thatthey need in order to feed themselves, now and in the future.

FIAN’s vision is a world free from hunger, in which every woman, man and child can fullyenjoy their human rights in dignity, particularly the right to adequate food, as laid down inthe Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments.

II

About this publication

The incidence and analysis of agro-fuel production in India are at a nascent stage. The

project by FIAN in cooperation with the Heinrich-Boell-Foundation India has taken the

initiative to systematically examine the issue, with particular emphasis on RTF. This agro-

fuel watch guideline is supposed to be applied for monitoring of the status of the right to

food in the context of expansions of agro-fuel at community level.

Continuing work on these lines would serve to develop a better understanding of the

prospects and problems of agro-fuel in India. It is hoped that such an understanding can

lead to enlightened policies resulting in inclusive and sustainable development all.

Readers’ comments and suggestions are welcome at

FIAN International

PO Box 10 22 43

69012 Heidelberg

Germany

Tel: 0049 6221 65 300 30,

Fax: 0049 6221 83 05 45,

Email:[email protected]

http://www.fian.org

III

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AAY: Antyodaya Anna YojanaADB: Asian Development BankAP: Andhra PradeshBPL: Below Poverty LineCBDA: Chhattisgarh Bio-fuel Development AuthorityCBO: Community Based OrganisationsCPR: Common Property ResourcesCSMCRI: Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute (CSMCRI)CSO: Civil Society OrganisationsDPR: Detailed Project ReportETO: Extra Territorial ObligationsEU: European UnionFAO: Food and Agricultural OrganisationFIVMS: Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Mapping SystemsGAR: Genuine Agrarian ReformGDP: Gross Domestic ProductGOI: Government of IndiaGP: Gram PanchayatICESCR: International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural RightsICO: Indian Oil CorporationIFI: International Financial InstitutionsIICT: Indian Institute of Chemical TechnologyIIT: Indian Institute of TechnologyILO: International Labour OrganisationIPCC: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeIPP: Institute of PetroleumIRDP: Integrated Rural Development ProgrammeKBK: Kalahandi, Bolangir, KoraputMDG: Millennium Development GoalsMDM: Mid Day MealMLI: Multi Lateral InstitutionsMNC: Multi National CorporationsMP: Madhya PradeshNGO: Non Governmental OrganizationNOVOD: National Oilseeds and Vegetable Oil Department BoardNREGS: National Rural Employment Guarantee SchemeOREDA: Orissa Renewable Energy Development AgencyPAU: Punjab Agriculture UniversityPDS: Public Distribution SystemRTF: Right to FoodRTI: Right to InformationSC: Scheduled CasteSHG: Self Help GroupST: Scheduled TribeTNC: Transnational CorporationsUBB: Uttarkhand Bio-fuel BoardUN: United NationsUS: United StatesVG: FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the Right to FoodWB: World BankWWF: Worldwide Fund for Nature

IV

CONTENTS:

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

1.1 The Right to Food and Agro-fuel 1

1.2. Aim of this Guideline and Methodologies 2

Chapter 2: Expansion of Agro-fuels in India 3

2.1.Definition and Distribution 3

2.2.Agro-fuel Policies in India 4

2.3.Main Promoters of Agro-fuel 5

Chapter 3: Cases of Violations of Right to Food (RTF)due to Agro-fuel Cultivation in India 7

3.1.Right to Food of peasant families threatened due 7to conversion of food crop in Giridih District, Jharkhand

3.2.Improper Transfer of land titles makes farmers landless, 8in Bolangir District, Orissa

3.3.Agro-fuel Plantation, Chitoor District, Andhra Pradesh 8

3.4.Livelihoods of Cattle Farmers Severely Endangered 9through Jatropha Plantation in Dehradun, District, Uttarkhand

3.5.Increased Water and Food Security due to Jatropha 9plantation , Tonk District, Rajasthan

3.6.Right to Food of Adivasis Severely Threatened 10due to Denied Access to Common Property for growingJatropha in Surguja District,Chattisgarh

Chapter 4: The Right to Food and its Violations in theContext of Agro-Fuel Expansions in India 11

4.1.The Right to Food as per International 11Human Rights Instruments

4.2.Right to Food and National Legal 11and Policy Frameworks

4.3.Violation of Right to Food due to expansion 12of Agro-fuel Policies in India

4.3.1.Food Autonomy is Compromised 13due to Agro-fuel Expansion

4.3.2.A Battle Between Food and Fuel in the 13Context of World Food Price Crisis

V

VI

4.3.3. Land Concentration and Eviction 13

4.3.4 Conversion of Characteristics of production 14of Land and its Impacts

4.3.5.Impact on the Most Vulnerable Group, Women 14

4.3.6. Competition for Water 144.3.7. Environmental Impact of Agro-fuel Expansion 14

4.3.8.Agro-fuel is not and Answer to Rural Unemployment 15

4.3.9.Lack of Awareness and Political Will 15

Chapter 5: Guiding Questions for Evaluatingthe Status of Right to Food 16

Agro-fuel practices 16

Infrastructure and agro-fuel production 16

Participation and information 17

Access to resources and assets 17

Nutrition status 17

Economic and ecological impacts 18

Chapter 6: Key Recommendations and Follow Up Strategies 19

6.1.Free, Prior and Informed Consent 19

6.2.Consultation and communication with 19local communities

6.3.Agrofuel production shall not take place 20on contested land

6.4.Access to ground and surface water is not 20diminished through either depletion or pollution

6.5.No land conversion/overuse of natural resources 20

6.6.Policy formulation regarding agro-fuel should 20be based on RTF concerns

6.7.Research, Documentation, Evaluation and 21Monitoring are needed periodically to ensure the rightto food of the communities affected by agro-fuel production

Annex 22

Relevance of the FAO Voluntary Guidelines on theright to food for agro-fuel expansion monitoring: a detailed analysis 22

List of References 25

1

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION

“Everyone has the right to a standard ofliving adequate for the health andwell-being of himself and his family,including food, clothing, housing andmedical care and necessary socialservices, and the right to the security inthe event of unemployment, sickness,disability, widowhood, old age or other lackof livelihood in circumstances beyond hiscontrol.” (Universal Declaration of HumanRights, Art. 25).

1. The States Parties to the presentCovenant recognize the right of everyoneto an adequate standard of living (…)including adequate food (…) and to thecontinuous improvement of livingconditions (…)

2. (…) the fundamental right of everyoneto be free from hunger (…) (InternationalCovenant on Economic, Social andCultural Rights, Art. 11)

1.1. The Right to Food and Agro-fuel

Realisation of the human right to food is one

of the gravest concerns in India which is the

home of the largest numbers of poor in the

world. Despite registering significant growth

in GDP, India is lagging behind in several

human development indicators. This shows

that the growth which is taking place in the

nation is not inclusive. The alarming trends of

increasing poverty, disparity and discrimination

are manifestations of a poor policy regime in

the country that does not sufficiently address

structural causes of poverty and chronic

hunger and does not implement basic human

rights, such as ensuring an adequate standard

of living for all, including access to food and

food producing resources.

The government of India has embraced the

policy of rapid industrialisation in line with

neo-liberal globalisation. Following the

liberalisation of markets, few policies and

programmes have emerged as vehicles of rapid

growth and as so called tools for mitigating

hunger problems and climate change

concerns. One such policy prescription is the

large scale introduction of agro-fuel production,

popularly known as bio-fuel in India during the

last decade.

With an understanding that the energy needs

in India might soon create a serious crisis1, the

Government of India (GOI) has been promoting

agro-fuels as an answer to this emerging threat.

Agro fuels are widely seen as viable and

convenient alternate sources of energy and as

substitutes for scarce fossil fuel. It is hoped,

that through agro-fuels the dependence on

foreign energy imports would be lessened,

employment and revenue would be created and

a positive impact against climatic change would

be made. However, as experiences from other

countries show, as the production of agro-fuel

requires land and water, their cultivation

competes directly with the food resources of

those people who are already suffering from

hunger and malnutrition. According to some

1 India consumes about 110 million tons of petroleumproducts in a year. Domestic production lakes care ofonly 30% of the country’s demand. The remaining 70%of the demand are met through imports and would fur-ther go up to 85% by 2020. As far as diesel is concerned.India consumes about 40.6 million tons in a year. India issixth in the world in energy demand accounting for 3.5%of the world’s commercial energy consumption.

2 FUELLING POVERTY? AN AGRO-FUEL GUIDELINE FOR INDIA

researches agro-fuel cultivations have lead to

massive eviction of people, deforestation and

increasing food price globally2.

Before designing and implementing policiesand programmes towards the use of agro-fuelit is necessary to consider the effects ofagro-fuel production on the enjoyment of thehuman right to food of the most marginalizedgroups and communities. India is a State Partyto the International Covenant on Economic,Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and istherefore obliged under international law torealise the right to food for all its citizens.

Rapid, unplanned and poorly consultedexpansion of agro-fuels in India is alreadyimpacting on the livelihood of the marginalizedand poor in the Indian society, which is incontrast to the obligations India has under theright to food: To guarantee to poor communitiessecure access to, and control over, naturalresources for food production.

1.2. Aim of this Guideline andMethodologies

A core element of the right to food is the directavailability of food from productive land or othernatural resources, related to people’s ability tofeed themselves by having secure control overland, water and other resources for foodproduction. Forced evictions and lack of accessto land and productive resources constitutemajor patterns of violations of the right to foodin India and worldwide. The expansion ofagro-fuel crops is increasing the pressure onland and water, and will lead to further alienationof marginalised groups from their naturalresources.

Considering the negative impacts of agro-fuelsit is imperative to critically analyse the policiesand programmes of the GOI and other actorsregarding agro-fuel, to raise communities’awareness concerning the larger implicationsof agro-fuel productions, and to provide them

with a set of tools to monitor the impact ofexpansions of agro-fuel on vulnerable groupsand their right to food.

This booklet shall serve as a basic orientation,applicable in the Indian context for the abovepurposes. Following a general discussionlaying out the present scenario of agro-fuels inIndia including scientific issues, policies andprocesses, six case studies from six differentIndian states illustrate the impact of agro-fuelgrowth on the right to food of rural households.The cases are carefully chosen to represent amaximum of relevant communities involved,issues concerned and human rights affected.A set of guiding questions for furtherinvestigation on the topic, together withrecommendations for policymakers and civilsociety conclude the guideline.

2 Even the supposed positive impact on the environmentis contentious as agro-fuels, according to many globalresearches, are not contributing to reduce green housegas emissions (FAO 2008).

3

2.1. Definition and Distribution

Fuel from plants and vegetation is calledagro-fuel or bio-fuel. Sometimes “bio-fuel” isused to indicate a wider range of products andpractices, incorporating “agro-fuel” within itsscope. More importantly, however, thedesignation “bio-fuel” has an environment-friendly overtone. In contradistinction, the term“agro-fuel” points to the link between food andfuel production and brings into focus the hiddenperils and human costs associated withventures encouraging the latter at the cost ofthe former. Therefore we will be using the termagro fuel in this publication.

In the Indian agro-fuel context, oneplant - jatropha curcas – has receivedoverwhelming attention until now. Jatropha, aplant from South America, has beendemonstrated to be a source of oil that isconvertible into a replacement for diesel. It is ahardy plant capable of growing in saline or aridsoil, it is not edible by people or animals, andhas other uses as illuminant for candles andlamps, fertilizer and lubricant for soap. Alongwith jatropha, other local sources such aspongamia, karanja, and putranjiva are alsobeing investigated. A major contender issugarcane as well as the imported sugar beetas sources of ethanol.

At present the GOI has proposed to convert3 million hectares of land for the cultivation ofjatropha in 200 identified districts in 19 Indianstates over a period of 3 years. Each districtwill be treated as a block and under each block15.000 ha jatropha plantation will beundertaken on the basis of availability ofwasteland, rural poverty ratio, percentage ofpeople below poverty line (BPL) and thesuitability of agro-climatic conditions suitablefor jatropha cultivation. A detailed project report(DPR) on the National Mission on JatrophaBio-Diesel has been submitted by the Ministryof Rural Development to the PlanningCommission, which, inter-alias, envisages ademonstration project, involving jatrophaplantation, on 400,000 ha of degraded forestsand non-forest lands for producing bio-diesel.

The Planning Commission has given ‘inprinciple’ approval to the DPR3.

Several Indian state governments havedeveloped appropriate authorities to deal withagro-fuel production in the state. InChhattisgarh, the Government has establisheda specific authority called “Chhattisgarh BiofuelDevelopment Authority (CBDA)” in 2005, whilein Uttarkhand a Bio-fuel Board (UBB) has beenconstituted as a nodal agency for bio-dieselpromotion. In Orissa, OREDA (OrissaRenewable Energy Development Agency) isthe main agency to promote jatrophacultivation. Generally, various ministries likeMinistry for Agriculture, Ministry forEnvironment and Forest, and Ministry for RuralDevelopment, are associated with the initiativesof promoting jatropha plantations at the statelevel.

Central and state governments are providinglands, subsidies and technologies to individualfarmers and companies for growing jatropha.Generally, all the state governments (exceptAndhra Pradesh, which is in favour ofconverting agricultural land to jatrophacultivations) have emphasized to grow jatrophaon ‘waste & degraded’ lands. However, thedefinitions of these terms remain vague andcommunity participation in identifying lands forjatropha plantations remain insignificant.

In most states, apart from the so-called “wastelands” also agricultural lands in particular khasland (state land) and forests are beingconverted into jatropha plantations. InChhattisgarh, six lakh4 saplings of jatrophahave been planted with the involvement of thestate’s Forest, Agriculture and Rural Develop-ment Departments on different categories ofland. The Karnataka government has statedthat marginal land and degraded land wouldbe used for growing jatropha, but thedefinition of marginal and degraded lands hasnot been made very clear. In Uttarkhand,

CHAPTER 2 : EXPANSION OF AGRO-FUELS IN INDIA

3Indian Programmes, The National Mission on JatrophaBio-diesel 2007, http://www.jatrophabiodiesel.org/indianprograms.php

4One lakh is one hundred thousand


jatropha has already been planted on one lakhhectare of land while in Andhra Pradesh twolakh acres have been devoted to jatrophaplantation in the initial phase. The mostimportant decision of the Andhra Pradeshgovernment is that wherever Jatropha cultiva-tion is undertaken on cultivable lands, it will betilled by the current owners who will beprovided crop and yield insurance.

At the initiative of the Tamilnadu government,jatropha has already been planted on 20,277hectares in this state. In Rajasthan, bothforest areas and agricultural lands areconverted into jatropha plantations Nearly 350hectares of land are under jatropha cultivationin this state. In Orissa, non-forest areas areproposed for jatropha There, the stategovernment has given financial support forgrowing jatropha nurseries, for developing oilseeds collecting centers and market supportprice benefits for purchasing oil-seeds. Thegovernment of Orissa has encouraged SelfHelp Groups (SHGs) to take an active part ingrowing jatropha.

For the promotion of jatropha plantationsvarious existing rural development policies andprogrammes are being used by different stategovernments. In Andhra Pradesh, thegovernment has used NREGS (National RuralEmployment Guarantee Scheme) to introducelarge-scale jatropha plantations in the droughtprone areas of the state. The government ofRajasthan has used land reform rules anddistributed khas land among peasants andcompanies in the name of ‘Green Patta’5 forjatropha cultivation.

2.2. Agro-fuel Policies in India

The issue of agro-fuel has recently assumedsignificance in view of spiralling prices of crudeoil in the international markets. The GOI hasgiven top priority to promote jatrophaplantations, and accordingly state governmentshave established concerned authorities.Various ministries are collaborating for thepromotion of jatropha plantations throughdifferent existing policies and programmes. TheMinistry of Agriculture, the Ministry of RuralDevelopment and the Ministry of Forest (bothat central and state levels) have played vital

roles in the expansion of jatropha all over thecountry. The GOI started a Bio-Fuel Mission in2003 and launched a Bio-fuel PilotDemonstration Project Scheme in the country.During 2004 and 2005 a relatively small amountof Rs. 9 crore6 was ear-marked for this mission.However, the Rural Development Ministry onlymanaged to spend Rs. 20 lakhs. The allocationfor 2005 and 2006 nevertheless was scaledup to Rs.45 crore. Despite these activities nocomprehensive national agro-fuel policy wasadopted until recently. On 12 September 2008the Cabinet has now approved a Bio-fuelPolicy7. The government is contemplatingshifting the responsibility for the Bio-DieselMission from the Rural Development Ministryto the Agriculture Ministry to give a boost tothe project.

At the initiatives of the GOI and the stategovernments various academic institutions areconducting important research works onvarious species of agro-fuels with a focus onjatropha For example Uttaranchal Bio FuelBoard, a government sponsored body, hasestablished a jatropha gene bank to preservehigh yielding seed varieties. It has developedthe ambitious plan to produce 100 million litresof bio-diesel within the next three years. Toproduce jatropha seedlings in 2007-2008,Rs.4.98 crore has been sanctioned by theGovernment of Tamil Nadu and Rs.2.50 crorehas been allotted to the Tamil Nadu AgricultureUniversity. The Tamil Nadu Government isseeking central subsidy to encourage dripirrigation and drip fertigation of jatropha cropsto maximize the production.

No significant initiative has been observed sofar on the part of the GOI to amend anyexisting law in order to facilitate growingjatropha in the country on a large scale. Thereis an attempt to link agro-fuel production withemployment generation, especially under the

5The Rajasthan government has a ‘green patta’ policythat allows for up to 5000 hectares of village commonlands to he transferred to bio-fuel companies for 20 years.

6One Crore is 10,000,000

7The text of the policy is still not available andconsequently is yet to be assessed.

5

NREGS (National Rural EmploymentGuarantee Scheme) of the central government.BPL families are employed for planting jatrophaunder this scheme. Land is clearly the first andmost important resource needed and thepreference would be not to use agricultural but“wasteland.” In most states across India,wastelands are often common propertyresources, village lands used for manypurposes including livestock grazing. However,different states define wasteland differently.Government land lying vacant for ten years ormore and unfit for cultivation by ordinary meansis considered wasteland in Chhattisgarh,whereas in Karnataka, it is marginal anddegraded land. Little attention is paid toresources other than land like water, althoughsome states such as Tamil Nadu areexperimenting with drip irrigation in order toconserve water. Universally, agro-fuel isexpected to be used primarily for motortransport in towns and cities. There are somesporadic instances of other foreseeable uses,such as the powering of “gensets” in ruralHaryana, where use of tractors and othermechanized tools in agriculture is widespread.In consideration of the novelty and the relatedrisk in cultivating fuel-yielding plants, a fewstates like Karnataka are encouragingagricultural insurance for farmers growingjatropha.

In brief, many state governments in line withthe central government’s initiative, havedecided to fulfill high expansion targets ofjatropha in the next few years. However, itbecomes also clear from the documentedcases that the state is yet to come up with acomprehensive guideline and infrastructure forextracting oil from jatropha seeds and amarketing strategy. In absence of a welldeveloped state sponsored processing systemfor extracting oil from Jatropha, the peasantsare becoming increasingly dpendent oninfrastructure of private companies. This alsoreduces the profit margin for the peasants.Some of the research that has been carried

out actually indicates that the costs of produc-tion of bio-diesel from jatropha could be veryhigh and might call for subsidies from the state.The corporate houses associated with bio-die-sel production in India have already urged theGOI to increase subsidies on bio-diesel. Itremains to be seen how these issues havebeen dealt with in the newly introduced bio-fuelpolicy of the GOI, which is yet to be madepublic.

2.3. Main promoters of agro-fuel

The main actors who promote agro-fuelcultivation on both national and internationallevel are mainly:

1 Corporate alliances of large multinationalagribusiness companies

2 Biotech companies (which includeagribusiness firms and their subsidiaries)

3 Oil Companies, e.g. British petroleum(BP), Exxon Mobil, Chevron-Texaco,Royal Dutch Shell.;

4 Groups representing large land ownersand plantation companies based in theglobal South

5 New agro-fuel companies, which includecompanies based in the North whichexclusively invest in plantations and/orcontract firming in the global South.

6 Car manufactures like Mahindra &Mahindra, Daimler Chrysler and,increasingly, airlines.

7 Forestry companies interested in secondgeneration agro fuels.

8 Corporate funders including venturecapitalists, hedge funds, private banksand development banks, andincreasingly, carbon trading firms.

9 The Anglo-American military - industrialcomplex which includes the big five


names as defence contractors(Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, NorthropGruman, Boeing and General, Dynamics)in alliance with British Aero-spacesystems corporation (BAES)

Corporate interests groups are today drivingagro-fuel policies, including in the EuropeanUnion (EU) and the United States (US). Thereason behind this are quotas in the EU andthe US which require large amounts ofagro-fuel that cannot all be produced within theEU and US.

Leading lobby groups behind this ‘blue print’include large environmental NGOs, many ofwhich have corporate connections (such as theUnited Nations Foundation, World ResourcesInstitute, World Watch Institute and WorldwideFund for Nature (WWF), US neocons (e.g. theSecuring America’s Future Energy) and anumber of Scientists/ Science Institutes,including the IPCC

In India, the entry of biotech companies andlarge agro-industrial corporations into thejatropha industry could be observed. Forexample, Daimler Chrysler working togetherwith the Indian research organization CSMCRI,have attempted to adapt jatropha oil for use incommercially produced car engines.

Besides the promoters of agro-fuel mentionedabove, other actors who are involved in theagro-fuel scenario at the global level includeinternational financial institutions (IFI) such asthe World Bank, governments of othercountries, the United Nations (UN) and itsorgans such as the FAO (Food and AgricultureOrganization), partnering organizations inagrofuel research, production and trade, andinternational civil society and rightsassociations.

Some of the institutions presently involved inresearch and development activities in Indiaare the following:

1 Punjab Agriculture University (PAU)

2 Coimbatore HorticultureUniversity with 250L/day bio-dieselproduction facility.

3 Institute of Petroleum (IPP)

4 Indian Institute of Chemical Technology(IICT)

5 Indian Institute of Technology

(IIT –Delhi & Madras)

6 Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) with60kg/day. Bio-diesel production facilityat Faridabad.

The Tamil Nadu Agriculture University isconducting training programmes related tojatroha cultivation for the farmers. The trainingsinclude topics like crop improvement using newvarieties & hybrids, production of qualityplanting materials, crop management, plantprotection.

7

Under the International Covenant on Economic,

Social and Cultural Rights each state is

responsible for ensuring that its own policies,

legislation, and activities comply with the

obligations to respect, protect and fulfil the

people’s right to food. Following case studies,

which have been investigated by civil society,

illustrate violations of the right to food in six

states of India (Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh,

Orissa, Uttarkhand, Rajasthan and Andhra

Pradesh).

Case 1

Right to food of peasant families threatened

due to conversion of food crop , Giridih

District, Jharkhand

Description of the Case:

Jatropha has been planted on 12 acres in

Rakaskuto village of Gandey development

block in Giridih district through Viliyam Megar

and Company Limited of Kolkata. The company

has mortgaged the farmers’ land as security to

get bank loan The farmers were also persuaded

to buy seeds directly from the company itself.

The farmers of Rakaskuto village had used the

12 acres of land for food grain cultivation prior

to the introduction of jatropha cultivation. Now

farmers are facing the problem of food

insecurity because the food crop production

has gone down in the village. In addition,

jatropha is not yielding any profit and the

farmers are also unable to contact the company

as the company representatives have

disappeared.

CHAPTER 3 : CASES OF VIOLATIONS OF THE RIGHT TOFOOD DUE TO AGRO-FUEL CULTIVATION

The people are gradually migrating from the

area due to the rapid decrease in food grain

production. Mostly it is the adult males who

are leaving their native village to look for

alternative livelihoods. Left behind, women and

children are finding it extremely difficult to

manage and extract proper yields from the land.

Migration has had a negative impact on the care

of the old and the young alike. In this situation,

especially the women of the families are facing

great hardships – economically, socially and

psychologically.

Main Issues Related to RTF:

Jatropha cultivation on food producing land is

destroying sources of food and livelihood of the

farmers in Rakaskuto. Instead of protecting the

farmers the state has become complicit by

providing financial assistance to the company

and failing to monitor its activities.

Conclusion/Recommendations:

The concrete demands of the villagers are:

1 Jatropha farming on agricultural land

should be stopped immediately and

under no circumstances should the

state encourage or be a party to such

practices.

2 State should provide adequate

infrastructural facilities for the

promotion of small holding farming

though realisation of genuine agrarian

reform programmes.

3 Special attention should be given to

traditional food grains and organic

farming.


Case 2

Improper transfer of land titles makesfarmers landless, Bolangir District, Orissa

Description of the case:

Bolangir is one of the KBK (Kalahandi BolangirKoraput) districts of Orissa. Drought and scantyrainfall are common, and chronic hunger leadsto migration. In 2007, an agro based companyfrom Mumbai had persuaded poor farmers inPatanagarh, Belpada and Khaprakhol blocksof Bolangir to grow jatropha for generatinghigher incomes.

People leased out 527 acres of their productivelands to the company for growing jatropha. Butafter a while they discovered that their land hadactually been sold to the company without theirknowledge. The farmers claimed that they gavethe land on lease only but the land recordsrevealed that the land had been sold to thecompany. The case was then brought to theattention of the then District Collector ofBolangir. After a long period of time this issuewas partly resolved with the company stoppingthe transfer of land titles. But the loss alreadyincurred by the people is yet to be recovered.Moreover, the villagers are now suffering fromwater scarcity due to the high demand of waterfor jatropha cultivation in this drought pronearea.

Issues Related to RTF:

Sequestering food producing land for jatrophais destroying food and livelihood security of thepoor farmers in Bolangir district of Orissa.Although the state has followed up on the issueon the basis of complaints registered by thefarmers, it failed to protect the farmersadequately by not proactively providinginformation and raising awareness aboutjatropha cultivation and its possibleconsequences. The state has further failed toprotect villagers’ access to safe drinking waterand water for irrigation as jatropha hasemerged as a main competitor for availablewater resources in this area.

Conclusion/ Recommendations:

The affected villagers are demanding thefollowing:

1 Agricultural land should not be used forjatropha cultivation

2 Water should not be diverted from foodcrop to jatropha production

3 Villagers’ legal rights to their land shouldbe immediately restored

Case 3

Agro-fuel Plantation, Chittoor District,Andhra Pradesh

Description of the case:

According to an ambitious plan by the AndhraPradesh Government an extent of 17 lakhacres would be brought under cultivation withjatropha and pongamia in 2008, mainly in the13 districts where the National EmploymentGuarantee Scheme has been underimplementation.

M/s Dyne – Bio-fuel Pvt. Ltd. Company isfacilitating the process of accessing benefitsfrom the government under NREG scheme forplanting pongamia in Madanpalli Revenuedivision in Chittoor district. The proposed agrofuel plantation will take place in around 50000acres of lands which are not suitable foragriculture and have been fallow for the lastfive years.

As part of the program, farmers have to selltheir pongamia production (seeds) to the Neo–Dyne bio-fuel company, with the average pricefixed by the government at the time ofharvesting. Thus, almost all the farmers haveopted for agro-fuel plantation because there isa possibility to receive government subsidy andbank loans for land development. Most of thefarmers have taken subsidies or loans from thegovernment or banks and utilized them todevelop their waste land.

9

Main issues related to RTF:

It is yet too early to conclude that the productionof jatropha or pongamia is going to affect foodcrop cultivation and subsequently food security.But past experiences with cotton, mulberrycultivation and food crops like tomato andaquaculture show that commercialisation ofagriculture is in most case negatively impactingon the livelihood of small farmers.


The situation described needs a proper followup and monitoring to prevent food scarcity inthe long run. Consultations between variousstakeholders like farmers, local communities,bio-diesel promoters, local NGOs, researchersand concerned government departments arerecommended. The state has the duty toprotect the food and livelihood security of thevillagers in the long run.

Case 4

Livelihoods of cattle farmers severelyendangered through jatropha plantationin Dehradun District, Uttarkhand


Out of the 1059 families in the village Joligrantin Dehradun District, Uttarkhand, 90% work assmall and marginal farmers. Agriculture andanimal husbandry are their prime sources oflivelihood. Traditionally the land from the forestdepartment is used by the local community aspasture land on which 80% of animalhusbandry of the village depend.

Since the government has started plantingjatropha on large tracts of forest and GramPanchayat (GP) land the access to grazing landhas been severely restricted. This has forcedthe community to take drastic measures. Onefarmer from the village, for instance,possessing 3000 cows and buffaloes, is nowforced to sell the animals because there isscarcity of grazing land


By converting the forest into jatropha plantation,thereby destroying and restricting grazing landfor livestock, the state is violating the obligationto respect the right to food of the livestockowners. Women of this area are especiallyaffected because they shoulder theresponsibility to collect dried wood from theforest for daily cooking.


The victims are organizing themselves and theirdemands are as follows:

1 The Government should immediatelyrestore their access to the forests andgrazing lands

2 Jatropha should be cultivated only onsuch land which would not affect thefood security of the villagers.

3 The victims of RTF violation in this vil-lage should be adequatelycompensated

Case 5

Increased water and food scarcity due tojatropha plantation, Tonk District,Rajasthan


Ratanpura is a small village in Newai Tehsil(administrative unit) of Tonk district and is about75 km away from Jaipur. For Mr. Om PrakashYadav and his family which consists of 11members, agriculture is the main source oflivelihood.. In 2006 he along with other farmersfrom the village had agreed to a contract withGCA Marketing (P) Ltd, Bhatinda, Punjab toplant jatropha on his land.

The crop did not come up well, stunted growthwas observed in all the cases. Even thoughthe farmers had been told that jatropha requiredminimum amounts of water and nutrients, theywere forced to irrigate the jatropha plants fromscarce water from nearby wells during drought.


Though a bulletin regarding jatropha wasdistributed by the agent of the company, thefarmers were unprepared for the demands ofthe crop in terms of water, nutrients and otherresources, neither were they prepared for anear total crop failure. As a result, they haveneither the yield from their food crops nor theincome from the jatropha plantation.. Moreover,their children fell sick and domestic animalsdied as a result of consuming plants and itsfruits.


The initiatives of the private company forgrowing jatropha in the village resulted inseriously eroding the food security of some ofthe villagers. The state has failed to control/monitor the activities of these companies andprotect the right to food of the villagers.


The victims of violations of right to food in thisvillage are demanding from the state:

1 The Government should have a clearpolicy and strict guidelines to preventthe cultivation of jatropha on agriculturallands

2 Jatropha plantation should not beallowed in drought prone areas ofRajasthan where water scarcity is amajor concern.

3 Compensation should be provided tothe concerned farmers for their lossesin terms of land, labour, livestock andcapital.

Case 6

Right to food of Adivasis severelythreatened due to denied access tocommon property resources in SargujaDistrict, Chattisgarh


In Larua village of Shankargarh DevelopmentBlock of Sarguja district Chattisgarh, mostlyinhabited by tribals, 36 families had beencultivating food grains on forest land for the

past 30 years. In 2005-2006, Governmentdispossessed the farmers from the land andplanted jatropha there. The Home Minister ofthe State Government promised the tribals ofSarguja that they would be allowed to producefood crops on other forest land but the promisehas not been fulfilled yet. The agro-fuel whichis to be produced here is not for localconsumption either. The poor peasants areforced to migrate in search of alternativelivelihood while women, children and theelderly, who are staying back, are suffering fromhunger, and scarcity of water. In some casesyoung women members have also beentrafficked in the absence of the male membersof the family.

Main Issues related to RTF:

Since the Government has dispossessed thetribals from forest land without compensation,the state has violated its obligation to respectthe right to food of these people. The stateshould ensure that poor tribals, being one ofthe most vulnerable groups, have free accessto Common Property Resources (CPR)including forests.


Jatropha cultivation has led to food insecurityand migration. Therefore the victims in this areademand from the state:

1 The Government should immediatelyrestore their access to forest land forfood cultivation

2 Conversion of forest land for jatrophacultivation should be stopped

3 Deforestation should be put to halt

11

4.1. The right to food in international humanrights instruments

According to the core elements and obligationsof the right to food, as defined by the UNCommittee on Economic, Social and CulturalRights in its General Comment 128, the majorimpacts of agro-fuel production observed sofar, can be analysed from a human rightsperspective. India, as a state party to theInternational Covenant on Economic, Socialand Cultural Rights and the community ofstates have legally binding obligations towardsthe realisation of the right to food.

The human right to food (RTF) as every humanright generates three types of statesobligations: to respect, protect and fulfil. Theobligation to respect means that States mustrespect existing access to adequate food andmust not take any measures preventing ordestroying such access. The obligation toprotect says that the State must take necessarymeasures to ensure that third parties likeenterprises or individuals do not deprive peopleof their access to adequate food. The obligationto fulfil demands from the state to guaranteeeach deprived person’s access to food and foodproducing resources with maximum efforts.This obligation applies also for victims of naturalor other disasters. Violations occur when thestate breaches one of the obligations under theright to food or when any discrimination existsin access to food, as well as to means andentitlements for its procurement, on thegrounds of race, colour, sex, language, age,religion, political or other opinion, etc.

A victim of a violation must have the possibilityto make use of effective judicial procedures toget adequate reparation such as restitution,compensation, satisfaction or guarantees ofnon-repetition. But in the case of the majorityof the poor in India who suffer from violationsof RTF due to agro-fuel expansions and dueto other factors, no such remedial procedureis effectively available for them.

The RTF does not only focus on the access tofood, but also implies the access to productive

CHAPTER 4 : RIGHT TO FOOD AND ITS VIOLATIONS INTHE CONTEXT OF AGRO-FUEL EXPANSION IN INDIA

or income generating resources. States mustenforce policies that foster adequate foodsupply at local and national levels and mustguarantee that food is economically accessiblefor all persons. States have also to regulatetheir economy and markets according to theseobligations and should not create incentivesthat put the realisation of the right to food atstake.

A core element of the right to food is the directavailability of food from productive land or othernatural resources, from which people are ableto secure their livelihood. Increased pressureon land and water caused by the aggressiveexpansion of agro-fuels is very likely to lead tofurther dispossession of natural resources bymarginalised rural groups. The renewedinterest in land by powerful economic actors isopposed to the implementation of agrarianreform policies needed to comply with statesobligations to realise the RTF.

4.2. The right to food and national legal andpolicy frameworks

The Indian Constitution guarantees the rightto life, livelihoods and the right to food. Indiahas embodied human rights principles asfundamental rights in part III Art 21 of theConstitution and endeavoured to secure” Rightto Livelihood” with an ingredient to provide“decent and dignified living” within a reasonabletime as “ Directive Principles of State Policy “in Part IV (Art 37 and 38.2). Art 39 of theconstitution guarantee equality, nondiscrimination in terms of the right to adequatemeans of livelihoods, and non concentrationof wealth. The community resources should bedistributed to serve common good. Art 43

8General Comment 12 to the International Covenant onEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 1966is currently the most authoritative UN interpretation of theright to food in international law:“The right to adequate food is realized when every man,woman and child, alone or in community with others, hasphysical and economic access at all times to adequatefood or to means of its procurement.”


ensures living wage, good conditions of work,adequate standard of living, full enjoyment ofleisure social and cultural opportunities, with afocus on development of small scalesustainable cottage industries and cooperativesin rural belt. Art 46 gives special attention toweaker sections and vulnerable groups. Apartfrom the above articles, Art 47 illustratesRTF further by emphasising on:

– Duty of the state to raise the level of nu-trition and the standard of living

– Focus on most vulnerable groups

– Prohibits discrimination in the use of pub-lic sources of water (Art 15.2b)

– Abolishes so called untouchability (Art17), provides specific protection towomen & Children 939 f) for SC & ST(art 46)

Besides constitutional provisions there areseveral state acts both at central and federallevels under which the immediate andprogressive realisation of RTF is obligatory.

These are:

1 Schedule Cast (SC) and Schedule Tribe(ST) prevention of atrocities Act 1989

2 National Rural Employment Guarantee Act(NREGA) 2005

3 Right to Information (RTI) 2005

4 Forest Bill 2006

5 Land Reform Act (few states)

6 73rd Amendment of the Constitutionempowering GP

Policies like Targeted Public DistributionSystem (TPDS), Mid-Day Meal (MDM) andAntyodaya Anna Yojana (AAJ) have beeninstrumental in facilitating poor peoples’ accessto food at micro level. Other policies likeNREGA, minimum wage, labour law, widowpension scheme etc. aiming at enabling poorto access work and/or income for survival. Landreform policies are in place to support landlessrural households in their endeavour to accessland and to be able to derive a livelihood fromit.

But the success of these policies islimited byother contradictory policies which liberalisetrade without sufficient safeguards, allowingfree flow of capital, open up domestic marketsleading to unfair competitions, reduce subsidiesin agriculture, health care and other basicservices, discourage the implementation oflabour laws in new industrial zones in thecountry, promote agro-fuel production,conversion of food crop to fuel crop,privatisation of Common Property Resources(CPRs) e.g. waste lands and proposeamendments in land ceiling to allowconsolidation of land in the hands of biginvestors, both MNCs and national corporatehouses.

4. 3. Violations of RTF due to expansion ofagro-fuel production in India

The UN special rapporteur on the right to food,Prof. Oliver De Schutter, describes the presentworld food crisis as a failure of implementationof the RTF and not only as a humanitarian ormacro economic problem: “What distinguishesa natural disaster from a violation from HumanRights is that in the latter situation, we arecapable of moving along the chain of causation,from the situation of the malnourished of thehungry to specific acts or abstentions by dutyholders”.

Therefore, while analysing a situation of hungerand deprivation associated with agro-fuelexpansion it is important to understand the roleof the state as the duty bearer in that case andhow the role of the state has shaped thesituation. Agro-fuel expansion policies andprogrammes in India have not considered RTFprinciples adequately. Rather the policies aredeveloped in haste in order to enable biginvestors to enter into Indian economy. Thecases documented in this document clearlyindicate that agro-fuel cultivation, replacingfood crop, reduces food security of thecommunity. All the cases further illustrate lackof knowledge of the peasants about jatrophaand about the promoters of jatropha, i.e. privatecompanies. The cases also highlight the factthat jatropha is reducing community’s accessto safe drinking water and watrer for irrigationneeded for food crops. Moreover, jatropha

13

cultivation has given rise to unclear land dealsat grassroots resulting into land alienation ofpoor and migration to urban areas in search oflivelihoods. These aspects are described indetail in the following paragraphs.

4.3.1 Food autonomy is compromised dueto agro-fuel expansion

RTF obligations of the state include access tofood and food producing resources like landand water to all. Large scale expansion of agro-fuel has mounted pressure on land and water,leading to further alienation of land and othernatural resources formerly controlled by poorand vulnerable groups. The cases documentedin Orissa and Jharkhand illustrate how ruralpoor in particular vulnerable groups aresuffering due to land alienation for agro-fuelcultivation. In both the cases land alienationsof the victims have affected their right to landand consequently violated their RTF.

The promotion of agro-fuel has reduced priorityon GAR which is a pre-condition for fullrealisation of RTF and not implementing thesame is a violation of fulfilment boundobligation9.

4.3.2 A battle between food & fuel in thecontext of the world food price crisis

UN special rapporteur on RTF Jean Ziegler inhis interim report submitted in 2007 stated that“The rush to turn food crops ….into fuel for cars,without first examining the impact on globalhunger would be a recipe for disaster”. QuotingLester Brown he further added that “The stateis now set for direct competition for grainbetween the 800 million people who ownautomobiles and the world’s 2 billion poorestpeople”.

The case documented in Jharkhand describeshow farmers of Rakaskuto village had usedtheir 12 acres land for food grain cultivationbefore Jatropha cultivation. The case furtherdocumented how conversion of food crop tofuel crop has resulted in a food crisis of thecommunity. India is presently suffering fromthe world food price crisis, too. Therefore theagro-fuel policy of the government should not

be implemented in such a way that the foodprice crisis intensifies.

4.3.3 Land Concentration and Eviction

Agro-fuel production causes landconcentration. It requires huge amounts ofland. Therefore, big investors are invading ruralareas in India, privatising common propertyresources and seeking help of the state toexpropriate land for agro-fuel plantation. Theseinvasions are resulting in land conflicts,changes in traditional production systems,fundamental changes in land holdings andproduction relationship at grassroots, distortinglocal power relations and disempoweringvulnerable and marginal groups. As immediateresults there are displacement, eviction andmigration of poor people from the rural areas.

A case in point is the case documented in KBKregion in Orissa. Allured by high promises ofthe companies, poor villagers ‘leased out’ 527acres of their productive lands to the companiesfor agro-fuel. Only later on they discovered thatthey were cheated and their land had actuallybeen sold to the company without theirknowledge, taking advantage of their pooraccess to information and institutions.

The state under RTF is duty bound to protectthe poor from invasions of a third party whichdestroys their livelihoods. Failure of the statein doing so in the case of agro-fuel expansionis a violation of the protect bound obligation ofthe state. Moreover, keeping land reformagenda in abeyance is also a violation of RTF.The rehabilitation and resettlement track recordof India is so poor that there is no doubt aboutthe doomed future of the victims of evictionsand displacements due to agro-fuel expansion.

Obligations of the state to refrain from andprotect against forced eviction from land arise

9For example, labelled with “Green Patta”, the govern-ment of Rajasthan is distributing land among peasantsand among companies under the land reform programmeexclusively for growing jatropha. This is a violation ofrespect & fulfilment bound obligation as the GOR isimposing conditions on poor peasent to receive landunder land reform programme and at the same timeundermining GAR Land ceilings are waved as up to 5000hectares of village common lands can be transferred tobiofuel companies for 20 years. Moreover, Green Pattaincludes 30% big investors, which is not in conformitywith the land reform programme


from several international legal instruments thatprotect the RTF and right to adequate housingand other related rights. But in the case of Indiaimplementation remains ineffective.

4.3.4 Conversion of characteristics ofproduction of land and its impacts

The conversion of agricultural land toagro-fuel plantation often results into loss oflivelihoods of small peasants. In many casesthese peasants afterwards become plantationworkers or contract farmers for big companies.This certainly is a vital change in productionrelationship. Like in the case documented inRajasthan, the peasant who entered into acontract with a company for jatropha cultivationsuffered huge losses after a major crop failure,and the company did not take any responsibility.Contract farming means loss of control overland and becoming increasingly vulnerable toexploitations by big companies who appointthese contract farmers.

The agro-fuel plantation being a monocultureis controlled by few big global companies in avertical production chain. Smallholders cannotcompete with these global giants. In addition,monoculture also destroys biodiversity to agreat extent.

4.3.5 Impact on the most vulnerable group:women

RTF demands an end to discriminations on thebasis of sex, colour, ethnicity etc. However,agro-fuel plantations are violating this principle.Agro-fuel related concentration of land,conversion of common property resources(CPR), diversion of water, eviction, loss ofbiodiversity destroy the food security especiallyof poor rural women. In India like in manydeveloping countries women are the main foodproducers. Being unable to compete with bigcompanies they are forced to abandon theirhousehold occupation: agriculture. They arelosing access to land and access to CPR.Reduced access to CPR like waste land orgrazing ground is detrimental for theirlivelihood. Traditionally these lands are thesource of food, fodders, fuel wood etc. Thecase as documented in Joligrant in DehradunDistrict of Uttarkhand and ShankargarhDevelopment Block of Sarguja district

Chattisgarh illustrate how tribal communitiessuffer due to expansion of jatropha plantationin forest land and pastures. The competitionfor water is also increased in rural areas dueto the expansion of agro-fuel, and once againwomen suffer most as they have to walk longerdistances to collect drinking water for theirfamilies.

4.3.6 Competition for water

Competition for water has increased due toagro-fuel plantation. This is a particularly bigproblem for the water-intensive sugarcaneproduction, but also for jatropha plantation.Jatropha, which is popularly known as a ‘lessdependent on water’ species does require quitea good amount of water for good yield.Moreover, jatropha reduces soil fertility to agreat extent. The competition for water hasreduced poor households’ access to safedrinking water on the one hand and water forirrigation for food crops in small holdings onthe other. The case from Rajasthan illustratesboth these aspects adequately. The jatrophaplantation in the Rajasthan case is demandinghuge amount of water thereby increasing waterscarcity at local level. Jatropha plantation isreducing soil fertility, too. These are violationsof the right to water and RTF as the peasant inRajasthan is losing access to fertile land andthe villagers nearby losing access to watergradually due to expansion of jatrophaplantations.

4.3.7 Environmental impact of agro-fuelexpansion

Contrary to the claim that agro-fuels will helpto fight climate change, the monocultureplantations for agro-fuel are increasing theemission of greenhouse gases, mainly throughdeforestation, drainage of wetlands anddismantling of communal lands10. Monoculturethreatens biodiversity and so does agro-fuelproduction. Loss of biodiversity hasconsequences for the necessary dietary

10The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

Nations, 2008, “The State of Food and Agriculture”, RomeAvailable at : http://www.fao.org/catalog/inter-c.htm

15

diversity which is required for adequate foodof the local community. Furthermore, ifpesticides are used to increase production, thisleads to contamination of water and otherhealth hazards.

4.3.8 Agro-fuel is not an answer to ruralunemployment

GOI is promoting agro-fuel for ruralemployment generation. Like in AP, NREGS isused for plantation of jatropha even in privatelands. In KBK region of Orissa, the state ispromoting jatropha cultivation ostensibly toaddress the hunger crisis there. However, theproject has not been developed andimplemented in a participatory way consultingwith local tribal people. There is also nosystematic planning on the production of agro-fuel from jatropha in that region so as to ensurethe proclaimed economic development of theregion. In addition to this, lack of political will ofthe ruling parties to implement programmes forthe poor, corruption and “red tapism” at all levelshave further aggravated the situation. There isas of now no significant proof that agro-fuelproduction will create employment. However,enough evidences are there that agro-fuelexpansion is destroying livelihoods of people.It is questionable whether NREGS could beused for the promotion of jatropha cultivationor whether Integrated Rural DevelopmentProgramme (IRDP) could be used forconversion of wasteland to jatropha plantationin tribal areas. This is because both of theseprogrammes are for promotion of food securityand jatropha cultivation will not necessarilycontribute to increase food security of thecommunity. The key question here is whetherthere would be new employment at a greaternumber than that of those who are evicted,displaced or have lost their livelihoods as aresult of expansions of agro-fuel plantations.The farmers from Rajasthan who went forjatropha cultivation and peasants from Orissawho leased out their land for growing jatrophahave lost their livelihoods and suffering fromfood insecurity .

11In 2004, the FAO adopted “Voluntary Guidelines to

Support the Progressive Realizalion of the Right toAdequate Food in the Context of Food Security at theNational Level” (the Guidelines) as a follow up to the WorldFood Summit series of conferences. The GuidelinesProvide a roadmap for states and civil society who wantto apply the human rights framework for strategies to endhunger. Several points of the VG are relevant in evaluat-ing the states of RTF associated with expansions ofagro-fuel.

4.3.9 Lack of awareness and political will

Violations of the RTF related to agro-fuel areaggravated by the lack of awareness andknowledge of poor and vulnerable groupsregarding their rights. The case from Orissa,Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh are live examplesof the lack of awareness of people aboutimpacts of jatropha plantations on livelihoods.Moreover, these cases also suggest that thepoor have very little access to take effectivelypart in local level decision making processes.Even the case documented in AP shows littleknowledge of the villagers about the future ofthe jatropha plantations, though presently thereis no RTF related crisis noticed. Thegovernment has not taken any initiative toenlighten people about their right to food. Onthe contrary, many mid level staterepresentatives are themselves not even awareof RTF provisions. According to the FAOVoluntary Guideines on the Right to Food11 thestate has the responsibility to make peopleaware of their rights and take decisionsregarding the introduction of new projects in aparticipatory way. This has not been done incase of agro-fuel expansion in India. The poorgovernance at local level is a further constraintfor the realisation of RTF.


RTF has an obvious priority over agro-fuelproduction. The role of the state in ensuringRTF is well explained in all international humanrights instruments and national legal frameworkas discussed above. In the analysis of violationsof RTF associated with agro-fuel expansionsin India, a set of questions can be applied togenerate a better understanding of the degreeand dimensions of violations of RTF, and tohighlight the reasons behind such violations,with specific focus on the failures of the stateactors.

The vital points for analysis and investigationare

● Is the state taking a proactive role insafeguarding and promoting RTF whiledeveloping and permitting expansionstrategies for agro-fuel production?

● Do democratic procedures and goodgovernance exist at grassroots level,enabling the poor actors to fully participatein land-related decision processes?

● Are evictions or displacement taking placebecause of agro-fuel expansion? Arevulnerable groups affected?

● Have small-holders profited from agro-fuelproduction and if so, how, and does thisprofit exceed the losses suffered by thecommunities due to agro-fuel production?

● Do victims have effective access toremedial procedures in case of violationsof RTF due to agro-fuel production?

Guiding questions

The questions in this section are developedto foster efficient and thorough monitoringat community and local level. They providea set of criteria which will help victims,Community Based Organisations (CBOs)non Governmental Organisations (NGOs)Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and stateactors to identify violations of RTF associatedwith expansion of agro-fuel at micro level.The questions are comprehensive but notexhaustive, and new cases may require moreand different ones.

CHAPTER 5 : GUIDING QUESTIONS FOR EVALUATING THESTATUS OF RTF

Agro-fuel practices

● What are the different agro-fuelscultivated/planted (species)?

● What are the different impacts ondifferent varieties?

● Which types of lands are used for thispurpose?

● What is the model of production (smallscale, corporate)?

● Who are the investors (state, privatecompanies, individual peasant)?

● Who are the growers/producers (peas-ants, companies, state actors)?

● How and where are the harvested cropsmarketed?

● Is there any processing unit nearby?

Infrastructure and agro-fuel production

● Is agro-fuel crop replacing food crop atcommunity level?

● If yes, what steps are taken by the stateto ensure the production of food crop atcommunity level and/or ensure accessto food in conformity with the obligationsunder the right to food?

● Is there any discrimination between foodcrop and agro-fuel crop in terms ofreceiving infrastructure support providedby the state (access to market, credit,research, capacity building otherassistances etc.)?

● Who takes the decision regarding theintroduction of agro-fuel projects inspecific communities and whoidentifies lands for agro-fuel production?

● To what extent are governmentinstitutions associated with thisprocess, and what proportion of land isdirectly purchased by privatecompanies?

17

Participation and information

● Are there regulations in place whichforesee the participation of all stakehold-ers with regard to agro-fuel policy andRTF (Information sharing, participatorydecision making)?

● Are all stakeholders well informed andconsulted in the decision makingprocess and are Gram Panchayatsfunctional and inclusive?

● Is there prior and informed consent oflocal communities about large gro-fuelprojects?

● Are vulnerable groups excluded fromdecision making processes?

● Do state-led mechnisms exist to informpeople of their RTF at local andcommunity level?

● Is information related to agro-fuel and itsprobable impact on communities availablein the public domain (in local languages)?

● Are there particular awareness/educationprogrammes targeted to vulnerablegroups?

● Does information regarding complaintmechanisms and remedies exits?

● How far and how often are theseissues being discussed at Panchayatlevels and are these discussionsrecorded (minuted)?

Access to resources and assets

● Has land alienation and/or evictionincreased due to agro-fuel expansion?What is the number and percentage ofpeople and vulnerable groups affected byland alienation and/eviction?

● Are land reform, land tenure, tenancyreform policies and practicesundermined or nullified due toagro-fuel expansion?

● Is the need of water for agro-fuelproduction undermining the right to safedrinking water of the community?

● Which rights of vulnerable groups

(women, tribal, Dalits) have been particu-

larly undermined due to the promotion of

agro-fuel?

● Are peasants, fishermen (due to

water pollution), and poor women’s

income affected due to agro-fuel

production at community level by

private actors or state actors?

● Do human rights defenders active in the

field of RTF and agro-fuel expansion face

any obstacles/repressions?

● Are legal conflicts increasing in

agro-fuel zones concerning access to

land, CPR, forests?

● Do state programmes exist which aim at

preserving biodiversity and the

conservation of local and traditional

species and crops?

● If private companies are involved, what

are their roles? Is there any evidence of

contract farming practices?

● If yes, what are the measures taken by

the state to prevent private actors from

taking away people’s resources and to

depriving vulnerable groups of their

lawful rights?

Nutrition status

● Is the production of food crops at

local level affected?

● Have availability and physical/economic

accessibility to food of these communi-

ties changed due to agro-fuel cultivation?

● Is there any change in the nutrition status

of the community due to the diversion of

land to agro-fuel crop?

● Has malnutrition increased? Is there a

seasonal pattern of hunger emerging?


Economic and ecological impacts

● What is the Panchayats’ budgetaryallocation for the promotion of RTF incontrast to the promotion of agro-fuelcrops?

● What are the impacts of food securityprogrammes (NREGS, IRDP, SHGs etc.)for agro-fuel on the most vulnerablegroups?

● Are food security programmes used foragro-fuel expansion, and if so, how?

● Is soil fertility decreasing in agro-fuelcultivation zones? If yes, what are theindicators and trends?

● Is water scarcity increasing?

● Is the use of pesticides increasing, and ifso, what the effects on the land andpeople?

● Are there any other forms of pollutionincreasing at the local level, and are thereassociated health hazards being noticed?

● Are there any adverse (unforeseen)changes observed in agriculturepatterns?

19

The entire issue of agro-fuel is intricately linkedwith human rights concerns, the first andforemost being the right to food. Agro-fuelprogrammes are not solving the problem ofmalnutrition in India, but posing severe threatstowards the already critical food situation ofmany marginalised communities affected.

India as a state party to the InternationalCovenant on Economic, Social and Culturalrights is committed to take every possible stepto realise the right to food of its people. If Indiaplans to continue with its agro-fuel policy, it hasto put the principle of precaution into practice,which means, that the impacts of such policieshave to be investigated at different levels.

At this background, we recommend the stateof India to ensure the following:

6.1. Free, Prior and Informed Consent

● The right to use the land can bedemonstrated and is not legitimatelycontested by local communities withdemonstrable legal or customary rights.

● Local people are adequatelycompensated for any agreed landacquisitions (social, economic & cultural)and land for land (of equal worth/quality)rehabilitation should be provided to thevictims prior to displacements/evictions

● Use of the land for agro-fuelproduction does not diminish thelegal rights, customary rights ortraditional rights of other userswithout their free, prior and informed con-sent.

● If agro-fuel plantations are at all allowedsafeguards should be on place againstsocial and environmental harm

6.2. Consultation and communication withlocal communities

● There are documented and implementedpolicies and procedures for open andtransparent communication with local

CHAPTER 6 : KEY RECOMMENDATIONS & FOLLOW UPSTARTEGIES

communities and other affectedstakeholders before commencement ofany project and on an ongoing basis onfor example, plans for expansion,construction, sale of the plantation,restructuring etc. Gram Panchayats (GP)should be made functional in takingdecisions regarding local resource use.This will also respect the 73rd amendmentof the Indian constitution, whichempowers GP as a local self governmentto take development decisions in acollective and inclusive way.

● Vulnerable groups must have adequateopportunities to take effective part indecision making process within GP.

● State should take initiatives to makepeople aware of their RTF and aboutplans regarding agro-fuel expansions.State actors should also be adequatelysensitised about RTF and should bemotivated to judge any agro-fuel projectin the context of RTF concerns. Allrelevant information regardingexpansion of agro-fuel should be madeavailable in public domain by the statewell in advance:

● A social platform should be developed byCBOs & promoted by the state to debateand discuss about social, environmentalsustainable criteria of agro-fuel. Thisplatform will also ensure an effectivemonitoring regarding implementation ofagro-fuel related programmes at microlevel and its impact on livelihoods. At amacro level such platform could providea critical analysis of impact of global agro-fuel policies on different nation states(developed, developing, underdevelopedcountries )


6.3. Agro-fuel production shall not takeplace on contested land

● Agro-fuel should not replace food cropsand no resources should be diverted fromfood crops to agro-fuel.

● There must be no evidence of violentconflict or forced evictions for land foragro-fuel production.

● Applicants must provide an environmentaland social assessment for new agro-fuelproduction projects, including disaggregatesocial impacts and alternatives.

6.4. Access to ground and surface water isnot diminished through either depletion orpollution

● There must be evidence of compliance withnational and local regulations or industrystandards relevant to contamination anddepletion of water sources.

● There must be a documented watermanagement plan and annualdocumentation of applied Good AgriculturalPractices with respect to responsible useof agro-chemicals, efficient water use andwaste discharge.

6.5. No land conversion/overuse of naturalresources

● Agro-fuel should not promote monoculture.Priority should be given to promote foodcrop production and subsidies should bewithdrawn from agro-fuel to discourage theproduction of the same. Particularlyconversion of common PropertyResources (CPR), wasteland, grazinggrounds for agro-fuel production should bestrictly banned through stringent legalprocedures and community basedmonitoring. Jatropha should never becultivated on fertile land and land used bythe community for common purposes.

● Emphasis should always be there onensuring land tenure of vulnerable groupslike women, tribal and Dalits. GenuineAgrarian Reform should be given highestpriority in national policies with maximumavailable resources allotment for thispurpose.

● Livelihood of people and their rights underForest Act should not be threatened bydiversion of resources for production ofagro fuel.

● No deforestation or over exploitation offorest resources for purposes of agro fuelproduction should be there.

6.6. Policy formulation regarding agro-fuelshould be based on RTF concerns

● While devising the policy for agro fuel de-velopment, the right to food of the peopleof India, especially the disadvan-taged sections should not be compromisedor adversely affected in any way.

● In developing any policy related to agro-fuel at national level the state must adoptan integrated approach. Human Rights or-ganizations and mechanisms should bemade involved in policy formulation regard-ing agro-fuel at global-state levelto ensure that human rights obliga-tions are followed and vulnerable groups’access to land, resources andentitlements is ensured.

● The national policies should ensure spaceand protect small peasants to produce foodfor themselves and for the local market withlow input cost. Small scale organic farmingshould be promoted with support from thenation state and the internationalcommunities.

● If at all agro-fuel is promoted, the modelshould be family based small scaleproduction rather than large scale industrialproduction. Small scale farmerscooperative for growing agro-fuel shouldbe considered as an alternative tocorporate agro-fuel production and stateshould support such ventures.

● Lessons should be learnt from othercountries, where agro-fuel production hasseverly violated the right to food ofthousand s of people. Similar policies/programmes should be avoided and notreplicated.

● The state must formulate/provide adequatelegislative measures for the victims ofviolations of the right to food due to agro-fuel expansion, so that they can get justice.

21

6.7. Research, Documentation,Evaluation and Monitoring are neededperiodically to ensure the right to food ofthe communities affected by agro-fuelproduction

● There is a need to document theimpact of agro-fuel expansion on thelivelihoods of poor, particularly Food, sothat policies and programs could be de-veloped to prioritize and secure their rightsover expansions of agro-fuel

● Environmental impact of production ofagro-fuel, especially its impact on soil andecosystem, should be evaluated beforeembarking on a project.

● A large population of rural India does nothave access to energy resources.Researches are needed to develop suchagro-fuel which would serve the need ofthe rural poor households (bio-gas etc.)and not the hunger of the global automo-bile industries.


In 2004, the FAO adopted “Voluntary Guide-lines to Support the Progressive Realizationof the Right to Adequate Food in the Contextof Food Security at the National Level” (theGuidelines) as a follow up to the World FoodSummit series of conferences. The Guidelinesprovide a roadmap for states and civil societywho want to apply the human rights frameworkfor strategies to end hunger. Several points ofVG are relevant in evaluating status of RTFassociated with expansions of agro-fuel. It maybe mentioned here that categorisation of theseguidelines (respect, protect, fulfil) are not donein the original document and this attempt hasbeen made here to illustrate state’s rolefurther in terms of steps expected from thestate, or in other words how the state willpromote provide and facilitate RTF in thecontext of agro-fuel expansion policy.

3.1 Respect

● Guideline 3.2 calls for careful assessmentof national legislation, policy andadministrative procedures in order todevelop elaborate strategies for fullrealisation of RTF

● Guideline 8.2 asks the state to ensure thatvulnerable groups have equal access toresources and opportunities for enjoyingRTF.

● G-10.1. reminds state of the cultural valuesof traditional dietary eating habits. Agro-fuelbeing a monoculture will undermine theseaspects of RTF and the state should besensitive to the rights of the people.

● Guideline 14.3 reminds state the principleof non discrimination in designingappropriate safety nets for targeted groups.These guidelines also remind the state toinclude the costs of these measures in thestate budget

Annex

Relevance of the FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the right tofood for agro-fuel expansion monitoring: a detailed analysis

● Guideline 3 reinforces call by the UNCommittee for a national human rightsbased strategy in consultation with relevantstakeholders for full and progressiverealisation of RTF

3.2. Protect

● Guideline 1 underlines the necessity fordemocracy , good governance, humanrights and rule of law

● Guideline 5.5 recommends to set upeffective anti-corruption measure and toimplement the same

● Guideline 8 asks the state to ensure thatactivities of the private business sector andcivil society are in conformity with RTF andto ensure that forced evictions are stopped.In the case of agro-fuel invasion of privatecompanies on CPR and reducing accessto land and resources of poor are greatmatters of concerns from RTF perspective.

● Guideline 8.6 asks state to be gendersensitive and this is particularly suggestiveas agro-fuel will reduce women’s accessto land, resources and entitlements.

● Guideline 8.8 calls on states to takemeasures to ensure that labour conditionsare consistent with the obligations ofprotections under RTF and ILO treaties

● Guideline 8.10 guides the state to formulatestrategies in promoting and protectingsecurity of land tenure with a focus onvulnerable groups which is a big challengein the context of agro-fuel expansion.

● Guideline 8.12 asks state to protect geneticresources and biodiversity and promotetraditional knowledge and sustainablesmallholding agriculture

● Guideline 10.1 calls on state wherenecessary to make measures to ensure,adapt or strengthen dietary diversity andcultural diversity

23

● Guideline 13 asks for genderdisaggregated data of community i.e. boththe victims and the beneficiaries,information on why some groups areadversely affected than others , whichgroup will be affected. why it will be affectedand how it will be affected. If futureinsecurity is high project the should beabandoned, it also calls for establishingFood Insecurity and Vulnerability MappingSystems (FIVMS).

3.3. Fulfil

● Guideline 3.2 asks the state to assess andensure national legislation, policy andadministrative measures in the strategiesfor full realisation of RTF. Guideline 5.5recommends the state to develop andimplement adequate anti-corruptionmechanisms, which is a great concern inthe context of investment projectsconcerning agro-fuel.

● Guideline 5.3 advises the state to developan institution for coordination progress ofimplementation of VGRF where as

● Guideline 5.4 asks state to provide fullsupport to that institution as mentioned in5.3 to fulfil its tasks. These efforts willincrease participation, transparency and willreduce corruption in the future course ofactions regarding agro-fuel in India.

● Guideline 7.2 refers to the need to haveadministrative, quasi-judicial and judicialmechanisms to provide adequate, effectiveand prompt remedies to the victims, whichso far is largely absent in the Indianscenario and will be of paramountimportance in case of conflict resolutionrelated to expansion of agro-fuel andrealisation of RTF in the country.

● Guideline 8.1 calls on states to facilitatesustainable, non-discriminatory and secureaccess and utilisation of resources and toprotect the assets that are vital for people’slivelihoods.

● Guideline 8.2 calls on state to implement

land reform land tenure, tenancy reform

policies and practices to effectively

broadening sustainable and secure access

to and control over land and related

resources for poor and most vulnerable

● Guideline 8.4 states that the state should

promote basic food production with its

positive effects on basic incomes and its

benefits to small and women farmers as

well as poor consumers, to this end state

should promote agricultural research and

development. This must be taken into

account while developing strategies for

expansion of agro-fuel in India.

● Guideline 8.6 further calls on state to ensure

women’s full and equal participation in

economy

● Guideline 11.8 calls on state to make

people aware of human rights including

RTF and G 11.5 calls on state to promote

information to individuals to enable them

to participate in food related policy

decisions and if necessary they can

challenge the decision that threaten their

rights. Particularly important in taking

decision about agro-fuel projects at

grassroots

As a safeguard for vulnerable groups

Guideline 14 points out the need for

developing appropriate safety nets for the

vulnerable groups who might b affected due

to agro-fuel projects, while guideline

● Guideline 17.2 recommends to make RTF

impact assessment in order to identify the

impact of domestic policies programmes

and projects on RTF realisation RTF EA

could be done together with EIA in case of

AF


3.4 VG also call for international obligations

of community of states

● Guideline 2 says that national development

efforts should be supported by an enabling

international environment, the international

community and the UN system including

FAO. This is particularly important because

global powerful actors like EU, FAO WBare associated with promotion andmonitoring of agro-fuel in India.

● Guideline 15 sets important criteria for theorganisations and delivery of food aid. Foodaid should support national effort ofachieving food security. It should not disruptthe local food production and nutritionaldietary needs and cultures of recipientpopulations. This is once again as there isa concern that agro-fuel will reducebiodiversity and dietary diversity of the localcommunity. Apprehension is there thatagro-fuel will reduce food production,leaving many developing nationsdependent on long term food aid thusincreasing dependency on external sourcesfor realisation of basic human right: RTF.

● Guideline 19 focuses on monitoring MDGprogress with an emphasis on progressrelated to poverty reduction. It also asksstate to seek international cooperation ifand when necessary for implementation ofICESCR and it reminds states of theirExtraterritorial Obligations. All these issuesremind us that the key focus of all policiesshould be reduction of poverty and nototherwise. To this end cooperation is vitalas poverty and hunger are often shapednot only at national level but also at globallevel. Hence global interventions are verynecessary to regulate expansion of agro-fuel in different countries. Particularly whendeveloping countries are mainly producersand developed countries are so farconsumers of agro-fuel, Extra TerritorialObligations (ETO) of consumer countriesare of immense importance from RTFperspective.

25

List of References:

“Agricultural Policies Impact on IndianFarmers”, The South Asian , June 02,2007,available at

http://www.thesouthasian.org/archives/2007/agricultural_policies_impact_o.html

“Bio-Energy Programme”, available at: http://www.hareda.gov.in/bioenergy.htm.

“Biofuels: A Boon or A Curse”, The South Asian,December 16, 2007, Available at: http://www.thesouthasian.org/archives/2007/biofuels_a_boon_or_a_curse.html

Bio Fuel: The Next Generation SustainableFuel. 2007. Available at:

http://bioenergy.multiply.com/journal/item/4/Biofuels_The_Next_Generation_Sustainable_Fuel

Biofuel Hoax: Jatropha And Land Grab,Available at:

http://www.navdanya.org/news/5dec07.htm

Brink, J. 2008, Bio-fuels digest special reporton India: Lalu backs Jatropha, From Bio-fueldigest correspondent, Joelle Brink – July 4,2008

Chossudovsky, M. 2008. The Global Crisis :Food, Water & Fuel, Three FundamentalNecessities of life in Jeopardy, Global ResearchEide, A. 2008. The right to food and the impactof liquid biofuels (agro-fuels), Food andAgricultural Organisation of the United Nations,Rome.

Ernsting, A. 2008. Who is behind the Agro-fuelIndustry in the UK , Bio-fuel watch, Available at

w w w . b i o f u e l w a t c h . o r g . u k / d o c s /agrofuel_industry_in_the_UK.

FAONEWSRELEASE, 2008, “FAO calls forreview of biofuel policies and subsidies - An-nual report weighs opportunities and risks ofbiofuel”, Rome, 7 October 2008

FIAN India, The right to adequate Food inIndia, Parallel Report. Heidelberg, April, 2008.

Food First, FIAN position paper and strategypaper on agro-fuels, Heidelberg, October, 2008

Hungriest seven BJP – NDA ruled states,Available at:

Indian Programmes, The National Mission onJatropha Bio-diesel 2007, , Available at: http://w w w . j a t r o p h a b i o d i e s e l . o r g /indianPrograms.php

Kwa, A.2008. “ The Food Crisis” , Justcommentary International Movement for a Justworld Vol-8, No. 9, September 2000

Lane, J. 2008. “India Ministerial GroupApproves National Bio-fuel policy, Avoids keydecisions on Bio-diesel, Jatropha Support, BioFuel Digest, July 25, 2008. Available at:

http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/blog2/2008/07/25/india-ministerial-group-approves-national-bio-fuel-policy-avoids-key-decisions-on-biodiesel-jatropha-support/

Money Talk, “Future of Bio-fuels in Africa”,October, 21, 2008. , Available at:

http://upnaira.blogspot.com/2008/10/future-of-biofuels-in-africa.html

Pack, E. J. 2008. Will Jatropha invadeMozambique?

Petroleum Conservation Research Association,National Bio-fuel Center Available at :

http://www.pcra-biofuels.org/pcraNBC.htm

Ramachandran,J. 2008. Development:‘Agrofuels Triggering Destruction, Available at:

h t t p : / / w w w. i p s t e r r a v i v a . n e t / e u r o p e /article.aspx?id=6509

Suarez, S. et.al. Agro fuels in Brazil. Publishedby FIAN International, July 2008

The Financial Express , 2005. “AgricultureMinistry likely to take over bio-diesel mission”.Available at:

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Agriculture-ministry-likely-to-take-over-bio-diesel-mission/133253/


The Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations,2008, “The State of Food andAgriculture”, Rome. Available at:

http://www.fao.org/catalog/inter-e.htm

The Hindu Business Line.” Oil Ministry opensNational Bio-fuel Center our Bureau”. March15, 2006, Available at:

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2006/03/15/stories/2006031504400900.htm

Tsiko, S. 2007. Will Agro fuels Usher Famine?,Black Star News. Available at:

http://www.foodfirst.org/en/node/2073,

“UP to pioneer Jatropha research”, The Timesof India , Lucknow, 22 Sep 2004, Available at:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/859599.cms

Vackayil, J .2008. “Indian Stage to FuelJatropha Cultivation “, The Financial Express,(Mumbai)

Vackayil, J. 2008. Indian state to fuel jatrophacultivation. Available at:

http://bioenergy.checkbiotech.org/news/200716/Indian_state_to_fuel_jatropha_cultivation/

Via Campesina confronts the global agro-fuelindustrial complex , Maputo, Mozambique

Wall Street Journal. Indian Companies bet bigon Jatropha and Bio-diesel, , Available at:

h t t p : / / o n l i n e . w s j . c o m / a r t i c l e /SB118788662080906716.htmlwww.ifpri.org/pubs/cp/ishi08.pdf

Heinrich B - indiaenvironmentportalAbout Heinrich Boell Foundation Heinrich-Boell-Foundation (HBF)...

Documents

Transcript of Heinrich B - indiaenvironmentportalAbout Heinrich Boell Foundation Heinrich-Boell-Foundation (HBF)...