12
1 Introduction: Political Dimensions …
The book focuses mainly on liquid biofuels (namely, ethanol and biodiesel). Their
production has skyrocketed globally, accounting for most investments, political attention, praise, and criticism on the bioeconomy to date. Also, the research addresses
essentially the so-called “first generation” technologies based on conventional crops.
This pathway has consistently accounted for the lion’s share of global biofuel production despite long ongoing talk of next-generation biofuels (OECD/FAO 2019). The
commercial viability of these more advanced technologies, such as cellulosic ethanol
production, may still need improvement and remains debatable (see Robertson et al.
2008; Paul and Ernsting 2007; Raghu et al. 2006). Although the impacts of an eventual mainstreaming of more advanced technologies would certainly be worth investigating, to date the debates on their sustainability remain mostly forecasts, and they
do not (yet) reflect the way the bioeconomy has made inroads in the real world.
Finally, given the book’s attention to equity issues, there is a justifiable focus on
the rural poor in assessing social impacts. They are the most vulnerable actors that
have been involved in biofuel production, meaning real-world bioeconomy implementation, and they usually carry the highest stakes. Focusing on weaker actors is in
line with a political ecology approach (Bryant and Bailey 1997; Peet and Watts 2004).
Moreover, bioeconomy advocates frequently flag local development opportunities as
a rationale and moral backdrop (Dietz et al. 2018), akin to what promoters of agriculture biotechnology have long done. While those earlier promises have revealed
to be mostly rhetorical and unfulfilled (see Jansen and Gupta 2009), it is critical to
understand how the bioeconomy might repeat or avoid the same path.
1.4 A Focus on Emerging Democracies
Emerging countries have recently reshaped the global economy, changed the international political order, and muddled polarized divisions of the world that seemed
comparatively clear-cut by the end of the twentieth century—between the Global
North and South, developed and developing countries. Although most emerging
economies continue to be identified—and to identify themselves—as developing
countries (and therefore as part of the Global South), the distinctions between them
and their less-developed counterparts have become increasingly visible and harder
to ignore.
Emerging countries have been characterized primarily by high economic growth
rates and increasing political relevance at the international level, as suggested by
their alternative labels as “emerging markets” or “emerging powers” (The Economist
2008; OECD 2009; Hurrell and Sengupta 2012). For instance, thanks largely to them,
the participation of developing countries in international trade more than doubled
between 1994 and 2008, revealing their ascension not only in absolute but also in relative terms (Hanson 2012). Having navigated the 2008 financial crisis comparatively
well, emerging economies strode further in getting the upper hand (Schmalz and
Ebenau 2012), even if countries such as Brazil later succumbed to economic crises
that were only aggravated by the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic (UNCTAD
1 Introduction: Political Dimensions …
The book focuses mainly on liquid biofuels (namely, ethanol and biodiesel). Their
production has skyrocketed globally, accounting for most investments, political attention, praise, and criticism on the bioeconomy to date. Also, the research addresses
essentially the so-called “first generation” technologies based on conventional crops.
This pathway has consistently accounted for the lion’s share of global biofuel production despite long ongoing talk of next-generation biofuels (OECD/FAO 2019). The
commercial viability of these more advanced technologies, such as cellulosic ethanol
production, may still need improvement and remains debatable (see Robertson et al.
2008; Paul and Ernsting 2007; Raghu et al. 2006). Although the impacts of an eventual mainstreaming of more advanced technologies would certainly be worth investigating, to date the debates on their sustainability remain mostly forecasts, and they
do not (yet) reflect the way the bioeconomy has made inroads in the real world.
Finally, given the book’s attention to equity issues, there is a justifiable focus on
the rural poor in assessing social impacts. They are the most vulnerable actors that
have been involved in biofuel production, meaning real-world bioeconomy implementation, and they usually carry the highest stakes. Focusing on weaker actors is in
line with a political ecology approach (Bryant and Bailey 1997; Peet and Watts 2004).
Moreover, bioeconomy advocates frequently flag local development opportunities as
a rationale and moral backdrop (Dietz et al. 2018), akin to what promoters of agriculture biotechnology have long done. While those earlier promises have revealed
to be mostly rhetorical and unfulfilled (see Jansen and Gupta 2009), it is critical to
understand how the bioeconomy might repeat or avoid the same path.
1.4 A Focus on Emerging Democracies
Emerging countries have recently reshaped the global economy, changed the international political order, and muddled polarized divisions of the world that seemed
comparatively clear-cut by the end of the twentieth century—between the Global
North and South, developed and developing countries. Although most emerging
economies continue to be identified—and to identify themselves—as developing
countries (and therefore as part of the Global South), the distinctions between them
and their less-developed counterparts have become increasingly visible and harder
to ignore.
Emerging countries have been characterized primarily by high economic growth
rates and increasing political relevance at the international level, as suggested by
their alternative labels as “emerging markets” or “emerging powers” (The Economist
2008; OECD 2009; Hurrell and Sengupta 2012). For instance, thanks largely to them,
the participation of developing countries in international trade more than doubled
between 1994 and 2008, revealing their ascension not only in absolute but also in relative terms (Hanson 2012). Having navigated the 2008 financial crisis comparatively
well, emerging economies strode further in getting the upper hand (Schmalz and
Ebenau 2012), even if countries such as Brazil later succumbed to economic crises
that were only aggravated by the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic (UNCTAD