Rocheleau (2008) outlines four methodological hallmarks of political ecology: multiple scales of analysis; multiple methods, objectives and audiences; the integration of social and biophysical evidence; and, empirical observation and data gathering at the local level. All of these components are clearly relevant to this analysis of biofuels, although the Guatemalan field setting placed constraints on what could be achieved at the local level. Further, owing to limited time, financial resources, data availability and my own research interests, a biophysical analysis was not within the scope of this study. In this section, I focus on the first of Rocheleau’s hallmarks, namely the multiple-scales of analysis (2008), for which I employed a ‘nested’ case- study design.
Since its inception, ‘chains’ or ‘webs of explanation’ have been a defining characteristic of political ecological research (e.g. Blaikie and Brookfield 1987; Rocheleau 2008). Conceptualisations of scale have moved away from the purely hierarchical (i.e. household, local,
regional, national and global) to also incorporate the vertical and temporal dimensions; policy, practice and effects also represents an important scale of analysis (Rocheleau 2008). All of these notions of scale were important to this study.
In order to anchor this multi-scalar analysis in specific empirical sites, a ‘nested’ case study design was adopted (see Figure 6). The specific case studies were elaborated during the research on the basis of their importance to biofuels in Guatemala. Yin (2009: 18) defines a case study as ‘an empirical enquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon in-depth and within its real-life context’. This design is particularly useful where the researcher wishes to gain a rich understanding of the research context and the processes and power relations that affect the phenomenon being investigated (Flyvberg 2006). These characteristics mean that case studies have been used extensively in political ecology to demonstrate how social and ecological change is connected to wider political economic processes (e.g. Blaikie and Brookfield 1987; Fairhead and Leach 1996; McKenzie 2005).
This thesis’ commitment to examine the multiple scales of biofuels began with the identification of the principal case – Guatemala. As discussed in Chapter One, this nation was selected for a number of reasons. It is the Central American state with the greatest potential in the production, trade and consumption of biofuels due to high yields of sugarcane and palm oil (USDA 2010, 2012a). As well as immense personal interest in the politics, history and culture of Guatemala, the offer of support from contacts there – particularly academics and NGOs engaged in the biofuels issue – constituted a further motivating factor; these connections not only assisted in setting up the research, but they also provided essential support throughout the study.
Shifting outwards from the level of the nation state, it was also essential to examine Guatemala – a developing world producer country – as nested within the global political economy. Chapter Two described the increasingly complex webs that characterise global trade in biofuels and the growing concern about the potential negative sustainability outcomes. It is therefore critical to examine emerging governance mechanisms in order to anticipate, avoid and mitigate future problems. Guatemala is one country that has responded to the increasing global demand for biofuels. As the key export market for biofuels produced in Guatemala, the EU – selected here as a proxy for the ‘global’ level - was identified as a further case for analysis. The EU is one of the few markets to address the sustainability impacts of biofuels, and a condition of market access is that biofuels must be certified sustainable. This makes it an excellent case
study for examining whether this mode of governance is able to capture the sustainability concerns that matter to the Guatemalan context.
Figure 6. The nested case study design
The next scale of analysis was within Guatemala – representing a ‘case within a case’ – that of the sugarcane sector. This case emerged once I had commenced the field investigation phase in Guatemala; only with immersion in the field did the salient features and complex dynamics of the sector (and how I should ultimately investigate it) become clear. Sugarcane was selected for the principal reason that, at the time of research, it was the only sector producing biofuels on an industrial scale. Since 2006, the production of fuel grade ethanol from sugarcane has increased from virtually nil to 94 million litres per year. All of the ethanol produced in Guatemala was certified ‘sustainable’ by the EU-approved International Sustainability and Carbon Certification (ISCC) scheme. Yet within Guatemala there was little consensus on whether sugarcane production, and therefore ethanol, was sustainable. Again, this makes sugarcane an obvious choice to examine the issues of interest to this thesis. Practical considerations also shaped this selection; for instance, an alternative case could have been African palm, however, I soon realised that accessing this closed and opaque sector would present significant challenges. Furthermore, from a personal safety perspective, the insecure nature of many of the regions cultivated with oil palm directed me towards the sugarcane sector. The case of African palm is
EU governance framework Guatemala Polochic Valley Sugarcane ethanol Pacific Coast
nonetheless included in this analysis because it was not possible to discuss the topic of biofuels with respondents without also touching upon this feedstock. As I discovered during the field research, there is currently no biodiesel production from African palm, yet the expansion of this feedstock has been subject to national and international controversy. This expansion has been blamed by NGOs on increased global demand for biofuels (e.g. ActionAid 2008; Alonso Fradejas et al. 2011), yet whether this is the case is uncertain. However, determining the (indirect) effects of global biofuel demand on vegetable oil markets and how that demand manifests in different world regions would have involved the use of complex economic and land use models, which was beyond the scope of this thesis.
Two further embedded cases, the Polochic Valley and the Pacific Coast, were chosen to investigate the production of the sugarcane feedstock in situ. At this local level, I was interested in the lived experiences of those who were affected – positively or negatively – by the cultivation of sugarcane. At this local scale, the choice of cases was somewhat easier, since sugarcane in Guatemala is predominantly produced in these two geographic regions. Figure 7 indicates the location of these two cases.
Figure 7. Map of Guatemala indicating the two areas of sugarcane production, the Pacific Coast and the
Polochic Valley
Source: adapted from SAVIA (2009) Polochic Valley
As with any research design, a case study design has certain limitations. In particular, case studies have been criticised by scholars from a positivist perspective for the perceived lack of generalisability (Stake 2005; Flyvberg 2006; Yin 2009). However, this research is rooted in the belief that the strength of qualitative case studies lies in the provision of rich, contextual data (Flyvberg 2001, 2006), which have the potential for transferability. Transferability is where aspects of such in-depth data may be transferred and applied to other contexts and situations (Flyvberg 2006; Baxter 2008; Bryman 2008; Yin 2009). In this instance, these data relate to the multiplicity of factors that influence the sustainability outcomes of biofuels. Having described the nested case study research design, the following sections elaborate on the methods used to generate the data whilst in Brussels and in Guatemala.
Cross-cultural research
The principal case was Guatemala which, in addition to the academic and security challenges raised in the previous section, gave rise to a number of ethical issues related to what is termed ‘cross-cultural research’. Methodological debates tend to focus on cross-cultural research carried out with marginalised groups rather than with ‘elites’, although there are exceptions (e.g. Herod 1999; Mullings 1999; Krznaric 2006; Gould 2010; Oglesby 2010). Research with the former in particular raises concerns about colonialism, the extraction of knowledge and asymmetrical power relationships between ‘researcher’ and the ‘researched’ (Sidaway 1992; Twyman et al. 1999; Howitt and Stevens 2010). However, investigating biofuels in Guatemala required fieldwork with multiple actors at multiple-scales; it involved negotiating relationships with different epistemic communities living in vastly different contexts. Moving between the socially disparate, but geographically close ‘worlds’ of my research (Gent 2014) – from the air conditioned offices in Guatemala City to my similarly affluent home in the capital, to the families in Alta Verapaz who struggled to survive on a dollar a day – required critical reflections of my own positionality. Furthermore, being exposed to and identifying with multiple worldviews required an awareness of how these different ‘worlds’ influenced my own perceptions and interpretations. Seeking to work in collaboration with local people, a willingness to put aside preconceptions, and to engage reflexively are all offered as ways in which the researcher can seek to redress power asymmetries in cross-cultural research (Howitt and Stevens 2010). While this research was not collaborative, the research topic (biofuels) addressed issues of concern to many participants, particularly those involved in social justice and environmental sustainability. During field visits with communities, I sought to counter asymmetrical power relations by positioning myself as the supplicant, willing to listen and to
learn from participants. Debate amongst feminist scholars about power, positionality and reflexivity has also been invaluable in thinking through some of these ethical issues, and are themes that recur throughout this chapter (e.g. Schoenberger 1992; McDowell 1992, 1998; England 1994; Katz 1994; Nast 1994; Mullings 1996; Rose 2006).