. Household income and food security

The competition for resources between sugarcane and food crops is apparent with foreseen consequent increased food insecurity. Fifty percent of the arable land area good for food crop production is equally good for sugarcane.

A farm household that allocates all of its one hectare of land to sugarcane is expected to earn 359 $ at high input level, 338 $ at intermediate level and 261 $ at low input level " in [4] ". The 391 $ required to purchase maize meal is well above the net margins from one ha. This shows that proceeds from one hectare cannot sustain a household of 5. It is further revealed that maize produced from 0.63 ha can sustain a household nutritionally; however considering the annual household expenditure (760.8 $; "in [17] "), about three hectares of land under sugarcane are required at low input level to support a household " in [4]".

However, this study reveals that sugarcane sales accrued from ethanol under a scenario of a flourishing bio-fuel industry is associated with increased income that is likely to support households (Table 9). An ethanol gross sale per person per day is 1.6 dollars; an indication that the cultivation of sugarcane based biofuel is likely to contribute to alleviation of household poverty. A trickle-down effect on household income is expected from a foreseen expansion of bagasse-based electricity generation beyond the estate into the national electricity grid.

Production / year

Gross sales

Conflict

Cane

production

Billion

Farm

Ethanol

Capita

Food

Gazetted

Forest

ton

litres

/ha/year

%

908.9 m

75.4

1869

22161

1.6

50.0

14.0

4.3

Sugarcane= USD 21/ton: projected population of 33 m in 2009 is used

Table 9. Sugarcane productivity, sales and potential land-use conflict

4. Further research

The expansion of cane production is largely driven by market forces oblivious to the detrimental impact the industry is likely to have on food, livelihood security and the status of biodiversity. In addition to lack of appropriate policies to support the small-scale cane farmer, the policies are largely sectoral with no linkages with other relevant policies. Information is required to support the sustainable development of the cane industry with minimal negative impact on food and livelihood security and the status of biodiversity.