Archive - Food vs fuel debate

The issue is further covered in the following publications, some of which are published by organisations that campaign against increased use of biofuels:

Biofuels for Transport Fact Sheet A summary published in 2013 by WBA, suggesting that there is sufficient land available for production of more food and feed as well as more biofuel and bioenergy feedstocks

(BIO) Fuelling Injustice  (1.6 Mb PDF) A report published in 2012 by EuropAfrica. The report suggests that 66% of the land grabs in Africa are intended for biofuel production, some 18.8 million hectares.

Determinants for the Level and Volatility of Agricultural Commodity Prices on International Markets - Are Biofuels Responsible for Price Volatility and Food Insecurity?  (2.6 Mb PDF) A report published in 2012 by Union for the Promotion of Oilseeds and Protein Plants (UFOP) and the Association of the German Biofuel Indistry (VDB)

Price Volatility in Food and Agricultural Markets (900kb PDF) A report coordinated by FAO and OECD in response ot request from G20, with input from FAO, IFAD, IMF, OECD, UNCTAD,WFP, the World Bank, the WTO, IFPRI and the UN HLTF.

Meals per Gallon (1.0 Mb PDF) Published by Action Aid, January 2010. A report supporting a wider campaign against the expansion of biofuels, particularly first generation.

Sustainability Standards for Bioenergy (1.5 Mb PDF) – Uwe R. Fritsche, Katja Hünecke, Andreas Hermann, Falk Schulze and Kirsten Wiegmann with contributions from Michel Adolphe, Öko-Institut e.V., Darmstadt. Published by WWF Germany, Frankfurt am Main, November 2006.

Please note that the material in these third-party reports is copyright of the respective authors, and permission is required for any reproduction of these publications. Any use of short quotes or extracts should mention the full title and credit the copyright holder. The content of the above reports is wholly the responsibility of the authors. The reports are included on this page to show differing views in the bifouels debate, and should not be considered in any way as reflecting the views of the EBTP, its stakeholders or the EC.