8.5 Conclusions
199
been keener on addressing international inequalities and catching up with developed
countries than on addressing their internal domestic discrepancies, such as in access
to natural resources and income. This bias arguably owes to the fact that development policy in these countries is crafted mainly by elites who do not suffer from the
poverty that still pervades large segments of the population. More than that, those
elites often benefit from such inequity and therefore have no incentive to address it,
let alone prioritize it. This dominance largely relies on instrumental and structural
advantages (e.g., finances, technology, better agenda-setting positions) over other
actors who could attempt to do differently, but both state and private actors have
also utilized discourses that legitimize their approach. Dominant discourses often
involve references to the public interest in the forms of national energy security and
development, international competitiveness, or an emphasis on climate change amid
different sustainable development concerns. In this way, domestic injustices are not
necessarily denied, but they are conveniently overlooked while public attention is
diverted elsewhere.
References
Afiff SA (2014) Engineering the Jatropha hype in Indonesia. Sustainability 6(4):1686–1704
Altieri MA, Toledo VM (2011) The agroecological revolution in Latin America: rescuing nature,
ensuring food sovereignty and empowering peasants. J Peasant Stud 38(3):587–612
Arima E, Richards P, Walker R, Caldas MM (2011) Statistical confirmation of indirect land use
change in the Amazon. Environ Res Lett 6:024010
Ariza-Montobbio P, Sharachchandra L, Kallis G, Martínez-Alier M (2010) The political ecology
of Jatropha plantations for biodiesel in Tamil Nadu, India. J Peasant Stud 37(4):875–897
Bastos Lima MG (2012) The Brazilian biofuel industry: achievements and geopolitical challenges.
In: Amineh MP, Guang Y, Secure oil and alternative energy: the geopolitics of energy paths of
China and the European Union, pp 343–369. Brill Publishing, Leiden
Bastos Lima MG, Persson UM (2020) Commodity-centric landscape governance as a double-edged
sword: the case of soy and the Cerrado Working Group in Brazil. Front For Glob Chang 3:27
Berkhout F, Wieczorek AJ, Raven R (2011) Avoiding environmental convergence: a possible role
for sustainability experiments in latecomer countries? Int J Inst Econ 3(2):367–385
Biermann F, Pattberg P (eds) (2012) Global environmental governance reconsidered. MIT Press,
Cambridge
Central Statistics Office (2019) Energy statistics 2019. Ministry of Statistics and Programme
Implementation, Government of India, New Delhi
Clapp J (2006) WTO agriculture negotiations: implications for the Global South. Third World
Quarterly 27(4):563–577
Cornwall A, Brock K (2005) Beyond buzzwords: “poverty reduction”, “participation” and
“empowerment” in development policy. Overarching Concerns Programme Paper 10. UNRISD,
Geneva
Corpuz PG (2012) Philippines Biofuels Annual 2012. US Department of Agriculture, Global
Agricultural Information Network, Manila
Cox R (1987) Production power and world order: social forces in the making of history. Columbia
University Press, New York
De Graaff N (2012) The hybridization of the state-capital nexus in the global energy order.
Globalizations 9(4):531–545
199
been keener on addressing international inequalities and catching up with developed
countries than on addressing their internal domestic discrepancies, such as in access
to natural resources and income. This bias arguably owes to the fact that development policy in these countries is crafted mainly by elites who do not suffer from the
poverty that still pervades large segments of the population. More than that, those
elites often benefit from such inequity and therefore have no incentive to address it,
let alone prioritize it. This dominance largely relies on instrumental and structural
advantages (e.g., finances, technology, better agenda-setting positions) over other
actors who could attempt to do differently, but both state and private actors have
also utilized discourses that legitimize their approach. Dominant discourses often
involve references to the public interest in the forms of national energy security and
development, international competitiveness, or an emphasis on climate change amid
different sustainable development concerns. In this way, domestic injustices are not
necessarily denied, but they are conveniently overlooked while public attention is
diverted elsewhere.
References
Afiff SA (2014) Engineering the Jatropha hype in Indonesia. Sustainability 6(4):1686–1704
Altieri MA, Toledo VM (2011) The agroecological revolution in Latin America: rescuing nature,
ensuring food sovereignty and empowering peasants. J Peasant Stud 38(3):587–612
Arima E, Richards P, Walker R, Caldas MM (2011) Statistical confirmation of indirect land use
change in the Amazon. Environ Res Lett 6:024010
Ariza-Montobbio P, Sharachchandra L, Kallis G, Martínez-Alier M (2010) The political ecology
of Jatropha plantations for biodiesel in Tamil Nadu, India. J Peasant Stud 37(4):875–897
Bastos Lima MG (2012) The Brazilian biofuel industry: achievements and geopolitical challenges.
In: Amineh MP, Guang Y, Secure oil and alternative energy: the geopolitics of energy paths of
China and the European Union, pp 343–369. Brill Publishing, Leiden
Bastos Lima MG, Persson UM (2020) Commodity-centric landscape governance as a double-edged
sword: the case of soy and the Cerrado Working Group in Brazil. Front For Glob Chang 3:27
Berkhout F, Wieczorek AJ, Raven R (2011) Avoiding environmental convergence: a possible role
for sustainability experiments in latecomer countries? Int J Inst Econ 3(2):367–385
Biermann F, Pattberg P (eds) (2012) Global environmental governance reconsidered. MIT Press,
Cambridge
Central Statistics Office (2019) Energy statistics 2019. Ministry of Statistics and Programme
Implementation, Government of India, New Delhi
Clapp J (2006) WTO agriculture negotiations: implications for the Global South. Third World
Quarterly 27(4):563–577
Cornwall A, Brock K (2005) Beyond buzzwords: “poverty reduction”, “participation” and
“empowerment” in development policy. Overarching Concerns Programme Paper 10. UNRISD,
Geneva
Corpuz PG (2012) Philippines Biofuels Annual 2012. US Department of Agriculture, Global
Agricultural Information Network, Manila
Cox R (1987) Production power and world order: social forces in the making of history. Columbia
University Press, New York
De Graaff N (2012) The hybridization of the state-capital nexus in the global energy order.
Globalizations 9(4):531–545