Environmental, land-use and economic implications of Brazilian sugarcane expansion 1996–2006

  • Gerd SparovekEmail author
  • Alberto Barretto
  • Goran Berndes
  • Sergio Martins
  • Rodrigo Maule
Original Article


Governments are promoting biofuels and the resulting changes in land use and crop reallocation to biofuels production have raised concerns about impacts on environment and food security. The promotion of biofuels has also been questioned based on suggested marginal contribution to greenhouse gas emissions reduction, partly due to induced land use change causing greenhouse gas emissions. This study reports how the expansion of sugarcane in Brazil during 1996–2006 affected indicators for environment, land use and economy. The results indicate that sugarcane expansion did not in general contribute to direct deforestation in the traditional agricultural region where most of the expansion took place. The amount of forests on farmland in this area is below the minimum stated in law and the situation did not change over the studied period. Sugarcane expansion resulted in a significant reduction of pastures and cattle heads and higher economic growth than in neighboring areas. It could not be established to what extent the discontinuation of cattle production induced expansion of pastures in other areas, possibly leading to indirect deforestation. However, the results indicate that a possible migration of the cattle production reached further than the neighboring of expansion regions. Occurring at much smaller rates, expansion of sugarcane in regions such as the Amazon and the Northeast region was related to direct deforestation and competition with food crops, and appear not to have induced economic growth. These regions are not expected to experience substantial increases of sugarcane in the near future, but mitigating measures are warranted.


Ethanol Sugarcane Brazil Land use change Pastures Deforestation Environment 



Financial support from the Swedish Energy Agency and the Brazilian Ministry of Agrarian Development is gratefully acknowledged.


  1. Berndes G, Börjesson P (2002) Crediting of plantation-induced carbon sinks: The case of Salix production in Sweden.12th European conference and technology exhibition on biomass for energy. Industry and Climate Protection, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  2. Börjesson P (2008) Good or bad ethanol—what determines this? Report No. 65, Department of technology and society. Environmental and Energy Systems Studies, Lund University, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  3. Crutzen PJ, Mosier AR, Smith KA, Winiwarter W (2008) N2O release from agro-biofuel production negates global warming reduction by replacing fossil fuels. Atmos Chem Phys 8:389–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S, Hawthorne P (2008) Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319:1235–1238 doi: 10.1126/science.1152747 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Farrell AE, Plevin RJ, Turner BT, Jones AD, O’Hare M, Kammen DM (2006) Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 311:506–508 doi: 10.1126/science.1121416 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gibbs HK, Johnston M, Foley J, Holloway T, Monfreda C, Ramankutty N, Zaks D (2008) Carbon payback times for crop-based biofuel expansion in the tropics: the effects of changing yield and technology. Environ Res Lett 3:034001 doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/3/3/034001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Guo LB, Gifford RM (2002) Soil carbon stocks and land-use change: a meta analysis. Glob Change Biol 8:345–360 doi: 10.1046/j.1354-1013.2002.00486.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. IBGE (2008a). Censo Agropecuário 1995/96. Cited 15 May 2008.
  9. IBGE (2008b). Censo Agropecuário 2006. Cited 15 May 2008.
  10. IBGE (2008c). Produção Agrícola Municipal (PAM). Cited 15 May 2008.
  11. IBGE (2008d). Pesquisa da Pecuária Municipal (PPM). Cited 15 May 2008.
  12. Ipeadata (2008). Cited 15 May 2008.
  13. Jung M, Henkel K, Herold M, Churkina G (2006) Exploiting synergies of global land cover products for carbon cycle modeling. Remote Sens Environ 101(4):534–553 doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2006.01.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Leemans R, van Amstel A, Battjes C, Kreilman E, Toet S (1996) The land cover and carbon cycle consequences of large-scale utilizations of biomass as an energy source. Glob Environ Change 6(4):335–357 doi: 10.1016/S0959-3780(96)00028-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Laurance WF (2007) Switch to corn promotes Amazon deforestation. Science 318:1721 doi: 10.1126/science.318.5857.1721b CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Marland G, Schlamadinger B (1997) Forests for carbon sequestration or fossil fuel substitution? a sensitivity analysis. Biomass Bioenergy 13:389–397 doi: 10.1016/S0961-9534(97)00027-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. OECD (2008) A review of policy measures supporting production and use of bioenergy. Report TAD/CA/APM/WP(2007)24/FINAL. OECD Trade and Agriculture Directorate, Committee for Agriculture. Working Party on Agricultural Policies and Markets. 20 March 2008.Google Scholar
  18. RFA (2008) The Gallagher Review of the indirect effects of biofuels production. Renewable Fuels Agency, UKGoogle Scholar
  19. Pimentel D, Patzek T (2005) Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Nat Resour Res 14(1):65–76 doi: 10.1007/s11053-005-4679-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schlamadinger B, Grubb M, Azar C, Bauen A, Berndes G (2001) Carbon sinks and the CDM: could a bioenergy linkage offer a constructive compromise? Clim Policy 1:411–417 doi: 10.1016/S1469-3062(01)00025-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA, Dong F, Elobeid A, Fabiosa J, Tokgoz S, Hayes D, Yu TH (2008) Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 319:1238–1240 doi: 10.1126/science.1151861 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sparovek G, Berndes G, Egeskog A, Luiz Mazzaro de Freitas F, Gustafsson S, Hansson J (2007) Sugarcane ethanol production in Brazil: an expansion model sensitive to socioeconomic and environmental concerns. Biofuels Bioproducts Biorefining 1:270 doi: 10.1002/bbb.31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerd Sparovek
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alberto Barretto
    • 1
  • Goran Berndes
    • 2
  • Sergio Martins
    • 3
  • Rodrigo Maule
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Sao Paulo/EsalqPiracicabaBrazil
  2. 2.Chalmers University of TechnologyGothenburgSweden
  3. 3.Entropix EngineeringPiracicabaBrazil

Personalised recommendations