Accompanying document to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - An EU policy framework to assist developing countries in addressing food security challenges {COM(2010) 127 final}
Date: 2010-03-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU policy, developing countries, development policy, food aid, food production, food resources, hunger, malnutrition, security of supply

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 31.3.2010 
SEC (2010) 379 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

An EU policy framework to assist developing countries in addressing food security 
challenges 

{COM(2010) 127 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This  Staff  Working  Document  (SWD)  accompanies  the  Communication  'An  EU  policy 
framework to assist developing countries in addressing food security challenges'1. It provides 
a brief comment on the public consultation on the related Issues Paper (section 2) and further 
elaborates  on  a  number  of  issues  raised  in  the  Communication,  some  of  which  were  also 
subject  to  specific  discussions  with  the  Member  States'  Heads  of  Agriculture  and  Rural 
Development  in  February  2010.  The  specific  issues  covered  in  section  3  of  this  SWP  are: 
right to food, nutrition, global governance for food security, price volatility, land acquisition, 
bioenergy and research and innovation. 

2. 

PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON THE ISSUES PAPER RELATING TO FOOD 
SECURITY 

The issues paper 'Towards an EU policy framework to assist developing countries addressing 
agriculture  and  food  security  challenges'  was  the  subject  of  an  online  public  consultation2, 
open  to  all  stakeholders  from  16th  November  2009  until  late  January  2010.  The  aim  of  the 
consultation  was  to  obtain  comments  and  responses  which  could  feed  into  the  drafting  of  a 
Communication on Food Security.  

Overall, forty-nine responses were received. Responses mainly came in the form of answers 
to the specific questions but general comments were also received on food security challenges 
and  policy  approaches.  Many  responses  came  from  NGOs  and  Member  States'  cooperation 
agencies,  supplemented  by  feedback  from  United  Nations  (UN)  organisations,  the  UN 
Rapporteur on the Right to Food, one partner country, trade unions, research centres, private 
individuals and two multinational corporations. 

A report summarising the comments received has been published online.3  

3. 

CURRENT ISSUES WITH AN IMPACT ON FOOD SECURITY  

Seven current issues related to food security, most of which were discussed in a meeting with 
the EU Member States' Heads of Agriculture and Rural Development, are elaborated below in 
greater detail. The seven issues were identified as having significant links with food security 
and are covered throughout the Communication, particularly in section 2, on the four pillars 
of  food  security.  These  issues  are  considered  high  on  the  international  agenda  towards 
tackling food insecurity and the achievement of MDG 1 on poverty and hunger. These issues 
are:  the  right  to  food,  nutrition,  the  global  governance  system  for  food  security,  price 
volatility, land acquisition, bioenergy and research and innovation.  

3.1. 

Right to Food 

The right to adequate food is realised when every man, woman and child have physical and 
economic access at all times to adequate food or means for its procurement. The rights-based 

1 
2 
3 

COM(2010) 127 of 31.03.2010 
http://ec.europa.eu/development/how/consultation/index.cfm?action=viewcons&id=4785  
Ibidem. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
approach to food security is based on the recognition that poverty, social exclusion and a lack 
of participation in political decision-making processes are the main causes of food insecurity. 
Economic  development  does  not  necessarily  lead  to  a  reduction  of  hunger,  and  can  even 
increase problems of access to food due to greater inequalities. Starting from this recognition, 
the right to food approach requests governments (who are the main duty bearers as signatories 
to  human  rights  conventions4)  to  respect  and  protect  existing  access  to  food,  to  take  action 
focused on the most vulnerable and to address pro-actively the underlying structural causes of 
hunger. A first step in this regard is the identification of causes, as well as the most vulnerable 
groups in society. In a second step, governments, at the national level, are requested to design 
a  strategy  for  the  realisation  of  the  right  to  food  with  clear  objectives,  benchmarks, 
responsibilities, multi-sectoral coordination and stakeholder participation.  

While  the  objective  of  fully  realising  the  right  to  adequate  food  cannot  be  achieved 
immediately (as it is not understood as right to be fed, but the right to produce sufficient food 
or gain sufficient income), the right to food approach spells out what states, civil society and 
donors in development cooperation ought to do in order to progressively move towards this 
goal.  In  this  process,  vulnerable  groups  (and  their  representatives)  should  be  empowered  to 
participate  in  the  formulation  and  evaluation  of  policies  and  strategies.  The  effective 
implementation  of  assistance  programmes  requires  some  form  of  public  control  and 
monitoring.  Moreover,  access  to  complaint  and  redress  mechanisms  helps  food  insecure 
groups  to  raise  claims  vis-à-vis  their  governments.  In  line  with  the  human  rights  approach, 
measures  set  up  by  the  government  and  stakeholders  rely  on  principles  of  accountability, 
transparency, participation, non-discrimination and empowerment.  

Since (women) farmers are in many cases among the most marginalised in society5, targeted 
assistance programmes supporting smallholder agriculture are in line with the Right-to-Food 
approach. Activities would involve support to access to credit, agricultural inputs, extension 
services, land registration systems and protection of land tenure, effective land redistribution 
programmes, and strengthening of cooperatives. Urban poor, landless or disabled people will 
have  to  be  targeted  by  employment  generation  and/or  social/food  safety  nets.  By  procuring 
food for public distribution through social protection programmes, for example, incentives for 
agricultural production could be created (twin-track approach).  

Donor  policies  need  to  be  further  accompanied  by  an  impact  monitoring  which  investigates 
success in targeting the most vulnerable, the improvement of a people's nutritional status and 
the enhancement of people's  capacities and resilience.  In order to advance the  realisation of 
the right to food, the development of a country-led food security strategy and the prioritisation 
of food security in poverty reduction strategies are crucial.  

Building an ambitious legal and institutional framework (through framework laws, integration 
of the right to food into the Constitution and institution building) is a long-term process and 
faces,  in  some  country  contexts,  huge  challenges.  Therefore,  a  starting  point  would  be  the 
formulation  of  political  commitment  to  food  security,  the  implementation  of  targeted 
assistance programmes and empowerment of the most vulnerable. The Voluntary Guidelines6 
give useful guidance on the necessary steps to achieve access to food at local levels.  

4 

5 
6 

The  Right  to  Food  is  laid  down  in  the  Universal  Declaration  of  Human  Rights  (1948),  as  well  as  in 
Article No. 11 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966/1976). 
See also SEC(2010) 265 
Voluntary  Guidelines  to  support  the  progressive  realisation  of  the  Right  to  Food  in  the  context  of 
national food security, adopted in 2004 by the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) Council 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
3.2. 

Nutritional adequacy of food intake  

The  consequences  of  under-nutrition  undermine  progress  towards  several  Millennium 
Development Goals (MDGs), including those on health and education. 3.5 million mother and 
child deaths per year and around 35 percent of the disease burden of children under 5 can be 
attributed to nutritional deficiencies (in iodine, iron, vitamin A and zinc, etc.). Nutrition has 
an  impact  on  the  health  status  in  adulthood;  and  in  turn  the  poor  health  status  of  a  mother 
affects the development of her children, allowing under-nutrition to be passed on to the next 
generation.  Nutritional  deficiencies  in  early  childhood  can  again  cause  irreversible 
consequences  for  physical  and  cognitive  development.  In  this  way,  under-nutrition  and 
poverty risk being perpetuated. 

Manifestations  of  under-nutrition  include  stunting  (chronic  restriction  of  growth  in  height), 
underweight  (low  weight  for  age),  and  wasting  (weight  for  height,  a  measure  of  acute 
exposure). The number of underweight children is estimated at 112 million and the number of 
children under five who suffer from stunting is estimated at 178 million. 160 million of the 
stunted children live in 36 countries7. An estimated 55 million children suffer from wasting; 
out of these 19 million children are affected by severe acute malnutrition (SAM).  

Malnutrition has immediate, underlying and basic causes. Immediate causes are related to the 
dietary  intake  and  the  health  status  of  people  (incidence  of  HIV/AIDS,  diarrhoeal  diseases, 
malaria,  and  measles,  etc.).  Underlying  causes  operate  at  household  and  community  levels: 
household  food  insecurity,  care  for  children  and  women,  and  quality  of  environment/health 
services. Basic causes operate at higher levels and range from access to natural resources to 
social, political and economic environments.  

Due to the complex nature of nutrition, a multi-sectoral response is needed, requiring political 
leadership and appropriate institutional arrangements. Coordination mechanisms should bring 
together  all  relevant  stakeholders  and  adequate  financial  resources  need  to  be  available  to 
underpin the political commitments. A significant evidence base provided by well functioning 
and  timely  nutrition  information  systems  is  indispensable,  as  well  as  appropriately  trained 
human resources in the various sectors.  

A package of (community-based) direct interventions targeting pregnant women and children 
has  been  identified  to  be  efficient  in  preventing  acute  malnutrition  and  micronutrient 
deficiencies,  involving  breastfeeding  promotion,  and  food  supplementation  or  fortification 
with  vitamin  A,  zinc,  iodised  salt  or  iron-folic  acid.  Adequate  food  consumption  may, 
however,  not  in  itself  ensure  good  nutrition.  Poor  health  may  inhibit  the  digestion  and 
absorption of nutrients leading to malnutrition. Therefore, interventions addressing access to 
potable water, sensitisation to adequate caring practices and hygiene should accompany direct 
interventions.  Activities  to  prevent  and  treat  malnutrition  need  to  be  integrated  in  national 
health systems. 

Indirect actions that improve households' access to food (employment generation, agricultural 
production, social safety nets) are needed to prevent people from getting malnourished and to 

7 

The 36 countries in which 90% of stunted children under 5 live are the following: Afghanistan, Angola, 
Bangladesh,  Burkina  Faso,  Burundi,  Cambodia,  Cameroon,  Cote  d`  Ivoire,  DRC,  Egypt,  Ethiopia, 
Ghana, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Myanmar, 
Nepal,  Niger,  Nigeria,  Pakistan,  Peru,  Philippines,  South  Africa,  Sudan,  Tanzania,  Turkey,  Uganda, 
Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, . 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
make  nutrition  interventions  effective.  Agricultural  programmes  and  research  need  to 
integrate nutrition objectives and targets. Extension services are needed to train smallholders 
on  cultivation  of  diverse  and  nutrient  rich  food.  Local  production  of  fortified  food  and 
micronutrients should be encouraged to ensure a better intake of nutritious food.  

At  the  international  level,  a  large  number  of  initiatives  and  agencies  exist  in  the  field  of 
nutrition.  Examples  are  the  REACH  –  Renewed  effort  against  child  hunger  -  initiative,  the 
Global Alliance for Improving Nutrition (GAIN) and the World Bank Global Action Plan to 
scale-up nutrition interventions. However, an effective global forum is missing. The Standing 
Committee  on  Nutrition  (SCN),  a  committee  that  involves  relevant  UN  agencies,  bilateral 
agencies,  NGOs  and  academia,  has  not  been  able  to  perform  this  role  satisfactorily.  Any 
global  forum  on  nutrition  should  be  effectively  integrated  with  the  Committee  on  Food 
Security (CFS, see below).  

3.3. 

The global governance system for food security 

The  crisis  response  in  2008-2009  has  given  rise  to  a  number  of  cooperative  initiatives  and 
arrangements.  The  UN  High  Level  Task  Force  (UNHLTF)  on  food  security  prepared  a 
Comprehensive Framework for Action (CFA), which provides a framework on actions aiming 
at  short  term  measures  to  respond  to  immediate  needs  and  longer  term  investments  for 
sustainable  impacts.  It  is  in  this  context  that  the  EU  Food  Facility  was  established  as  a 
medium-term instrument, which also supported the enhanced cooperation among UN agencies 
and  the  World  Bank,  members  of  the  UNHLTF,  in  joint  assessments,  and  coordinated 
prioritisation, implementation and review. This major political and financial initiative has also 
put the EU at the centre of discussions on world food security. Other initiatives were taken at 
FAO  Summits  and  at  the  G8  meetings  in  2008  and  2009,  including  proposals  for  the 
establishment  of  a  Global  Partnership  on  Agriculture,  Food  Security  and  Nutrition 
(GPAFSN), as well as the l' Aquila Food Security Initiative (AFSI). 

The  various  initiatives  and  the  current  food  security  architecture  pose  a  risk  of  lack  of 
coordination, or, in any case, considerable costs involved in achieving it. Furthermore, there is 
a  risk  that  the  recent  coordination efforts will be reversed (e.g. within the  UN system), that 
global responses will be spread too thinly and that partner countries will have difficulties in 
relating effectively to different processes.  

The reforms of the  Committee on World Food  Security  (CFS) aim  to make  this Committee 
the foremost inclusive intergovernmental platform for food security and nutrition, comprising 
governments  as  "members"  and  organisations  and  institutions  as  "participants".  Based  in  a 
UN-body  it  has,  in  principle,  the  credibility  and  neutrality  needed  to  attract  all  partners.  It 
benefits  from  the  support  of  an  existing  secretariat  with  established  relations  to  most 
institutions  and  countries,  relevant  for  global  food  security.  Nevertheless,  its  links  with  the 
(reformed) Food Aid Convention (FAC) and the Standing Committee on Nutrition (SCN) still 
need to be decided upon.  

With an aim to streamline the food security architecture and improve effectiveness, the CFS 
should  aim  to  obtain  an  oversight  role  in  other  specific  domains  with  implications  for  food 
security, including food aid and nutrition. Furthermore, the relationship with the Consultative 
Group  on  International  Agricultural  Research  (CGIAR)  and  the  International  Food  Policy 
Research Institute (IFPRI), will require further clarification, particularly regarding the relation 
between these and the High Level Panel of Experts (HLPE) of the CFS.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

At the same time, the  aid effectiveness agenda has progressed and become the fundamental 
"contract" between donors and partner countries. In Africa, there is now a stronger political 
and  institutional  basis  to  support  food  security,  both  continental  and  regional,  through  the 
African  Union  and  the  Comprehensive  Africa  Agriculture  Development  Programme 
(CAADP) as well as regional institutions. It is, therefore, becoming necessary that the global 
governance system is closely linked to and supportive of regional and national coordination 
and implementation initiatives.  

Improving global food security – meaning both reducing the number of food insecure at the 
global  level  as  well  as  improving  food  security  in  countries  with  a  high  degree  of  food 
insecurity  –  requires  greater  coherence  and  coordination  both  horizontally  (among  policies, 
countries,  organisations,  stakeholders,  etc.)  and  vertically  (between  local,  national,  regional 
and  global  levels).  For  this  to  be  achieved,  an  effective  and  streamlined  global  institutional 
set-up is required, with strong links to regional and national levels. This is one area where the 
EU  could  potentially  use  its  political  and  financial  leverage  to  move  towards  a  well 
coordinated  global  food  security  architecture  with  effectively  functioning  institutions, 
cooperating closely and operating on the basis of respective comparative advantages. 

3.4. 

Price volatility 

In 2007-08 prices of the main food commodities (among others, rice, wheat, and maize) rose 
sharply on the world market. Commodity prices doubled or tripled to reach their highest level 
in more than 30 years in nominal terms. In the second half of 2008, prices declined again and 
have  remained  relatively  stable  at  around  40%  below  the  peak  on  the  global  market  since. 
Since then, global grain harvests have been good: the 2008-09 harvest was the best in history 
and the 2009-10 harvest is likely to be the second largest. However, the current price level is 
still  well  above  that  of  the  years  preceding  price  hikes.  Food  prices  depend  on  commodity 
prices,  the  degree  of  processing,  and  the  structure  of  the  supply  chain.  Moreover,  in  many 
developing  countries  the  decline  of  prices  did  not  keep  pace  with  that  of  international 
commodity prices pointing to potential price transmission issues. In December 2009, the FAO 
Food  Price  Index8  stood  at  172,  compared  to  the  2008  average  high  of  191.  Similarly,  the 
Cereals  Price  Index9  was  171  at  the  end  of  2009,  compared  to  the  2008  (average)  high  of 
239.10 In general, prices have shown more fluctuation in the past three years than in the years 
before, at the global level, as well as at the national level.11 

Because  of  the  serious  effects  of  highly  fluctuating  agricultural  and  food  prices  on  poverty 
and  hunger,  as  well  as  on  agricultural  and  social  development  and  political  stability,  it  is 
important  to  examine  possibilities  to  deal  with  price  volatility,  including  private  initiatives. 
Food price levels and related volatility are the result of many interrelated factors12, including:  

•  harvest levels and crop failures, particularly in food exporting countries; 
•  the capacity for a swift supply response; 

8 

9 

10 
11 
12 

Average  of  six  commodity  groups  indices,  weighted  (for  the  average  export  shares  of  each  of  the 
groups) with base 2002-2004 = 100.  
Compiled  by  using  the  grains  and  rice  price  indices  weighted  by  their  average  trade  share  for  2002-
2004. 
For data and updates, see: http://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/FoodPricesIndex/en/ 
See data for various countries at: http://www.fao.org/giews/pricetool/ 
On the complexity and the various factors at play during the 2007-08 price spike, also see Commission 
Staff  Working 
prices: 
Paper 
Issues 
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/tradepol/foodprices_en.pdf  

Paper 

food 

high 

the 

on 

on 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
•  the  sudden  introduction  of  trade  distorting  measures  (mainly  export  bans  or 

levies); 

•  market psychology, such as hoarding behaviour among governments, traders and 
consumers (which played an important role in the sudden price spike of 2007-08 
for rice13); 

•  exchange rate fluctuations, particularly involving the US dollar; 
•  the stock-to-use ratio for the main food commodities, which when low implies a 

'thin buffer';  

•  uncertainty about stock levels in a number of countries;  
•  sharp  increases  in  consumption  of  certain  feedstocks  (like  maize)  for  the 

production of biofuels due to high oil prices;  

•  emergence  of  alternative  market  outlets,  in  particular  the  biofuels  market  with 
noticeable  impacts  on  the  US  maize  market  though  with  relatively  moderate 
impact in general;14 and 

•  other  demand-side  changes  (e.g.  changing  dietary  preferences  in  emerging 

economies). 

Price  volatility  signals  adjustment  to  new  market  circumstances.  However,  lack  of 
predictability  and  the  uncertainty  associated  with  it  may  influence  both  producers  and 
consumers. Volatility cannot be avoided fully. Policies can address extreme volatility and the 
risks  associated  with  it;  e.g.  by  increasing  the  stock-to-use  ratio  of  food  products,  and  by 
creating  conditions  for  adequate  stock  levels  to  be  kept,  particularly  at  national  and  local 
levels.  Moreover,  short-  and  medium-term  food  price  volatility  can  also  be  influenced  by 
improving  food  market  functioning  at  global,  regional  and  national  levels,  and  by  reducing 
food losses in the chain from producer to consumer. This implies attention to several aspects 
of  market  functioning,  such  as  reducing  trade  barriers,  including  export  restrictions, 
improving  market  transparency  (information  on  production,  reserves,  prices  etc.),  and 
reducing post-harvest losses. The impacts of price volatility can be mitigated by using a range 
of  measures,  including  the  establishment  of  scalable  safety  nets,  food  security  information 
systems,  use  of  (weather,  index)  insurance,  and  an  enhanced  capacity  to  use  price  risk 
management instruments.  

3.5. 

Land acquisition 

Large-scale  land  acquisition  and  long-term  leases  of  land  in  developing  countries  have 
recently gained policy attention. A range of factors15 has prompted investments in agricultural 
land.  This  development  has  led  to  increased  competition  between  various  land  use  interests 
and  raises  pressure  on  land  and  its  related  natural  resources  (e.g.  water).  These  'land 
investments'  entail  far  reaching  risks  but  also  offer  opportunities  for  sustainable  rural 
development. The risks are especially high where land tenure and user rights are inadequately 
documented  and/or  have  no  formal  legal  basis.  This  can  result  in  conflicts  over  land, 
relocation or displacement of local farmers losing the basis for their livelihood. On the other 
hand,  the  investments  can  be  justified  if  they  provide  adequate  returns  to  the  nation, 
equivalent access to food for affected people, new opportunities for out-grower involvement 

13 
14 
15 

See: C.P. Timmer, Reflections on food crises past. In: Food Policy, Vol. 35, February 2010. 
COM (2008) 321 
Driving  factors  include  continuing  population  growth  and  urbanization,  climate  change,  increased 
demand  for  agricultural  raw  materials  for  biofuels  and  other  industrial  purposes,  speculation  in 
anticipation of future land price increases and securing food supply in rich food importing countries. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

                                                 
and off-farm employment for local populations, enhance strategies to prevent food shortages 
and reduce risks, and contribute to improved local and national food security. 

Sound and effective national land policies and laws and democratic governance in these areas 
are the basis for securing land tenure and land use rights for vulnerable groups – in particular 
women and indigenous groups - for food production. Democratic governance at local level is 
a  significant  stake:  potentially  affected  actors  must  be  involved  in  the  decision-making 
process related to national and international investments in agriculture and agricultural land. It 
is  equally  important  that  large-scale  land  acquisition  and  long-term  leases  of  land  will  be 
linked to national food policies, strategies for food security and poverty reduction strategies. 
In  addition  to  national  land  policies,  internationally  agreed  principles  for  large-scale  land 
acquisition  and  long-term  leases  of  land  are  needed  to  guide  investors,  host  countries  and 
intermediaries,  such  as  banks,  international  and  development  organisations,  towards 
investments in agriculture that respect (human) rights, livelihoods and resources. 

Several  international  initiatives  are  currently  working  towards  sets  of  principles  for 
"responsible agricultural investments": i) a joint initiative of the World Bank, the International 
Fund  for  Agricultural  Development  (IFAD),  the  Food  and  Agricultural  Organisation  (FAO) 
and  the  United  Nations  Conference  on  Trade  and  Development  (UNCTAD),  which  was  a 
follow-up  to  a  G8  initiative  in  L'Aquila  related  to  responsible  agricultural  investments 
associated with land acquisitions; ii) an initiative of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on 
the right to food; and iii) the FAO proposed Voluntary guidelines on responsible governance 
of tenure of land and other natural resources. 

The  current  international  initiatives  to  set  up  principles  and  voluntary  guidelines  for 
responsible investments should be based upon broad multi-stakeholder consultations ensuring 
transparency and respecting democratic principles. The thrusts of different initiatives should 
be  linked  to  other  land  policy  frameworks  such  as  the  African  Union  Land  Policy 
Guidelines16 and the EU Land Policy Guidelines17. Principles and guidelines should comply 
with  the  international  Charter  on  Human  Rights  (especially  the  International  Covenant  on 
Economic,  Social  and  Cultural  Rights  (Article  11)18,  the  United  Nations  Declaration  on 
Rights  of  Indigenous  People19,  The  Ten  Principles  of  Global  Compact20  and  should  respect 
international  standards  of  Corporate  Social  Responsibility  adopted  by  intergovernmental 
bodies.  

In order to both stem the dangers and risks of the negative form of land 'grabbing', and also 
make optimum use of the possible opportunities and potential of development-oriented direct 
investment  in  land  and  rural  development,  forward-looking  political  guidance  and  action  at 
the following levels is required21: 

•  international policy dialogue; 

16 
17 

18 

19 
20 
21 

http://www.pambazuka.org/aumonitor/images/uploads/Framework.pdf (draft) 
Guidelines for support to land policy design and land policy reform processes in developing countries 
http://ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/EU_Land_Guidelines_Final_12_2004_en.pdf 
Adopted  and  opened  for  signature,  ratification  and  accession  by  General  Assembly  resolution  2200A 
(XXI) of 16 December 1966, entry into force 3 January 1976, in accordance with article 27 
Adopted by General Assembly Resolution 61/295 on 13 September 2007 
http://www.unglobalcompact.org/aboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html 
Federal  Ministry  for  Economic  Cooperation  and  Development  (BMZ):  Discourse  015  “Development 
policy  stance  on  the  topic  of  Land  grabbing  –  the  purchase  and  leasing  of  large  areas  of  land  in 
developing countries”: www.bmz.de 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
 
•  participation and civil society control; 
•  establishing  a  solid 

information  base  and 

transparency 

in 

the  contract 

negotiations; 

•  strengthening  and  supporting  national  land  policies  and  pertinent  legislation, 

including institution building; 

•  international guidelines for sustainable and responsible investments in land;  
•  making more consistent use of existing international law. 

Best practices and principles for responsible investments in agricultural land will need to be 
integrated  in  national  legislation  and  in  negotiations  of  investment  contracts,  as  well  as  in 
monitoring  and  evaluation  of  contracts,  relevant  global,  regional  and  national  food  security, 
agriculture,  land  and  governance  policy  frameworks  as  well  as  in  standards  and  codes  of 
conduct  for  foreign  direct  investment.  Moreover,  the  impact  of  large  scale  land  acquisition 
and  long  term  leases  of  land  on  food  security  and  poverty  reduction  (including  on  income 
generation,  labour  conditions  and  livelihoods  of  the  affected  population)  and  on  the  local 
environment  (including  on  biodiversity)  will  need  to  be  assessed  to  evaluate  the  social  and 
economic desirability and the sustainability of the investments.  

3.6. 

Bioenergies (including biofuels) 

There has been a significant growth in the global production and use of liquid biofuels over 
the last 5-10 years (multiplication by four between 2000 and 2008, of which a large part of the 
increase  in  the  US).  The  renewed  interest  in  biofuels  can  be  attributed  to  the  rising  and 
volatile price of oil, climate change mitigation, energy security and efforts to revitalise rural 
areas  and  technological  development  in  renewable  energies.  Incentives  for  bioenergy22 
production  in  developing  countries  are  created  by  policies  in  developing  and  developed 
countries and are likely to lead to an increase of international trade in biomass. It is expected 
that the EU Renewable Energy Directive with its 20% target for the overall share of energy 
from  renewable  sources  and  a  10%  target  in  transport  will  encourage  the  production  of 
bioenergy in third countries.  

The cultivation of bioenergy crops and plants in developing countries can offer a number of 
opportunities for rural development through the diversification of livelihoods and sources of 
income  for  farmers,  enhanced  agricultural  productivity  and  use  of  agricultural  residues  and 
waste,  increased  investment  in  rural  infrastructure,  increased  employment  opportunities  in 
agriculture,  industry  and  infrastructure,  improved  access  to  safe  and  sustainable  energy 
services, increased energy supply security, a reduced national oil importation bill, new trade 
opportunities  and  reduced  emission  of  pollutants,  including  greenhouse  gases.  On  the  other 
hand, the expansion of biofuels consumption also bears some concerns regarding the impact 
on natural resources and food security.  

At the local level a problem of access of smallholder farmers, pastoralist or forest-dependent 
people to land and other natural resources may arise. An increased interest in land by national 
and  foreign  investors  may  involve  displacement  of  farmers  and  destruction  of  local 
livelihoods.  Large-scale production  can  affect  farming  communities  by  the  excessive  use  of 

22 

Bioenergy  refer  to  energy  extracted  from  any  kind  of  biomass  such  as  plants,  wood,  forest  and 
agricultural residues and waste. Bioenergy comprise the traditional biomass for cooking, energy uses of 
biomass (solid and gaseous fuels in electricity, heating and cooling) or first generation biofuels made 
from vegetable or animal oils or sugars and starches. Second generation biofuels can be produced from 
wastes, residues and ligno-cellulosic material / woody sources. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
water, fertilisers and pesticides. Environmental degradation, and shortages and contamination 
of  water  have  the  potential  to  seriously  affect  a  community's  food  security,  with  possible 
negative impacts on livelihoods. The risks related to land acquisitions (see section 3.5. above) 
and  environmental  degradation  are  linked  to  agricultural  investments  more  generally,  not 
solely to biofuels.  

National  strategies  should  be  developed  in  tune  with  the  local  context  in  a  way  so  as  to 
maximise  the  opportunities  offered  by  bioenergy  production  while  limiting  negative 
disturbances.  National  policies  should  facilitate  addressing  concerns  over  food  security  and 
environmental  sustainability,  allocation  of  farm  land,  and  placing  further  emphasis  on 
domestic  consumption  of  renewable  energy.  Advice  and  support  should  be  provided  to 
governments on issues related to biofuel strategy development, as well as and acquisition and 
planning processes. Such a strategy should be based on studies identifying the potential in the 
country to grow energy crops, including the identification of suitable land and the selection of 
feed stocks suitable to local environmental conditions.  

Furthermore,  business  models  that  maximise  benefits  for  rural  populations  should  be 
encouraged. For example, projects in food insecure areas could integrate small producers in 
the value chain and/or contain a food component, while the local production and consumption 
of certain biofuels (e.g bio-energy based on cotton-oil or cassava based ethanol) can enhance 
energy use in rural communities. The strengthening of farmer associations, cooperatives and 
other  interest  groups  could  be  pursued  to  defend  small  producers'  interests  over  access  to 
natural  resources  to  improve  their  bargaining  power  vis-à-vis  processing  companies  and  to 
build networks of knowledge exchange.  

The  sustainability  criteria  and  other  elements  aimed  at  sustainable  bioenergy  production  set 
out in the EU renewable energy directive should constitute guidance for these local strategies. 

3.7. 

Research and Innovation 

Agricultural Research for Development (ARD) drives the innovation required for agriculture 
to  respond  to  the  growing  challenges  of  food  security,  climate  change  and  sustainable 
development  in  developing  countries.  The  European  Commission  supports  ARD  for  the 
generation  of  national,  regional  and  international  public  goods,  including  knowledge, 
technologies  and  capacity  which  enable  poor  smallholder  farmers  to  improve  their  incomes 
and  better  manage  natural  resources.  Approximately  €55  million  is  committed  annually 
through the Food Security Thematic Programme, with complementary projects supported by 
the 10th EDF and the Seventh Framework Programme of the Directorate General of Research 
and Technology Development. 

The  approach  to  ARD  adopted  by  the  European  Commission  recognises  that  it  is  most 
effective  if  it  is  demand  driven  and  is  part  of  an  innovation  system,  integrating  access  to 
inputs,  services  and  markets  and  extension.  This  approach  both  builds  on  traditional 
knowledge  and  practice,  and  on  the  integration  of  appropriate  new  technologies  into 
smallholder  farming  systems.  It  supports  existing  global  and  regional  institutions,  such  as 
CGIAR,  GFAR  and  FARA23,  and  builds  capacity,  while  promoting  reform  and  seeking  a 
wider engagement with farmers, particularly smallholders, and civil society. 

23 

Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, Global Forum on Agricultural Research and 
Forum on Agricultural Research in Africa. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

                                                 
European  policies  on  ARD  (Member  States,  plus  Norway  and  Switzerland)  are  coordinated 
through the European Initiative on Agricultural Research for Development (EIARD). 

The recent food crisis and mounting evidence of the impact of climate change on agriculture 
have  drawn  attention  to  the  potential  role  of  agricultural  biotechnology  in  helping  the 
developing world achieve sustainable food security. An AU/NEPAD review of biotechnology 
in Africa's development24 highlights priority applications in crops and forestry and the need to 
develop capacities, infrastructure, and a continent-wide regulatory framework. 

Some  promising  applications  that  are  already  being  supported  by  Commission  research 
initiatives are the development of food crop varieties that are more resistant to abiotic stresses, 
such  as  drought  or  floods,  or  can  perform  better  in  conditions  of  soil  nutrient  deficiency  or 
excess. This research is based on identification of relevant genes through molecular mapping 
and involves only conventional breeding.  

It is important that new technological initiatives should engage the public sector, address IPR 
concerns,  and  focus  on  capacity  strengthening,  building  and  enforcement  of  regulatory 
frameworks, and management of environmental risks.  

Some concrete areas for support through instruments of cooperation could be:  

•  Research  and  innovation,  geared  specifically  to  new  technologies  that  are  most 
relevant  to  the  objectives  of  sustainable  food  security  and  adaptation  to  climate 
change;  

•  Analysis  of  benefits  and  risks  of  new  technologies  and  provision  of  unbiased 

information so that developing countries can make informed choices; 

•  Support  to  agricultural  support  services  benefiting  smallholder  farmers,  such  as 

seed systems, extension, micro-credit and market information; and  

•  Capacity  building  and  assistance  in  the  development  of  appropriate  regulatory 
frameworks  at  national  and  regional  levels  taking  into  account  international 
commitments.  

24 

C.  Juma  and  I.  Serageldin  (2007).  Freedom  to  Innovate:  Biotechnology  in  Africa's  Development. 
AU/NEPAD.  

EN 

11 

   EN