Sugarcane ethanol systems can deliver large greenhouse gas emissions savings if emissions associated with land-use change are kept low. This qualitative study documents and analyzes actions and opinions among Brazilian farmers who shift to sugarcane production. Semi-structured interviews were held with 28 actors associated with sugarcane production in three different regions: one traditional sugarcane region and two regions where sugarcane is currently expanding. Most farmers considered sugarcane a land diversification option with relatively low economic risk, although higher risk than their previous land use. Beef production was considered a low-risk option, but less profitable than sugarcane. In conjunction with converting part of their land to sugarcane, most farmers maintained and further intensified their previous agricultural activity, often beef production. Several farmers invested in expanded production in other regions with relatively low land prices. Very few farmers in the expansion regions shifted all their land from the former, less profitable, use to sugarcane. Very few farmers in this study had deforested any land in connection with changes made when shifting to sugarcane. The respondents understand "environmental friendliness" as compliance with the relevant legislation, especially the Brazilian Forest Act, which is also a requirement for delivering sugarcane to the mills. Indirect land-use change is not a concern for the interviewed farmers, and conversion of forests and other native vegetation into sugarcane plantations is uncontroversial if legal. We derive hypotheses regarding farmers' actions and opinions from our results. These hypotheses aim to contribute to better understanding of what takes place in conjunction with expansion of sugarcane and can, when tested further, be of use in developing, e.g., policies for iLUC-free biofuel production.

Forest-derived biofuels have been on the agenda for several decades. Despite extensive research and development efforts, forest biofuel concepts have nevertheless not yet been realized on any significant scale. The discrepancy between the expectations from the research community and the lack of momentum regarding biofuel production raises the question of if and how research results can be used to achieve such goals. Here, we report results from an interview study with the aim of evaluating how energy system models can be used to illustrate barriers and drivers for forest biofuels, with focus on Swedish conditions, using the BeWhere model as case. The study is framed as an example of expertise, and problematizes how energy system models are interpreted among expected users. While the interviews revealed some general scepticism regarding models, and what kinds of questions they can answer, the belief was also expressed that increased complexity might be an advantage in terms of being able to accommodate more barriers against forest biofuels. The study illustrates the complexity of this policy area, where an energy system model can answer some, but never all, 'what if . . . ?' questions. The results reveal a need for reformation in energy system modelling in order to more explicitly make society the subject of the work, and also illustrate that the belief in expertise as a tool for consensus-building in decision-making should be questioned.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract