India has made significant progress in its Biofuel Mission over the last 10 years. The commitment to biofuel production, promotion and its usage as part of a global alliance was reinstated in India’s launch of the Global Biofuel Alliance at the G20 Summit of 2023. On the Bioethanol front, the country has achieved the target of 20 per cent blending much before the target date. The country has also realised and launched revised biofuel policies focusing on first — second generation biofuels and has also given clear policy directions on the need for multiple biofuel feedstock promotion to reach the Biofuel Target of the country to align with the net zero vision of India.

However, in this entire discourse of biofuel promotion and pathways for India, biodiesel has taken a backseat. Even though the country started its ambitious Biodiesel Mission way back in 2003, the Biodiesel Sector has almost stayed like a sub-altern in all Biofuel Discussions.

The history of the Biodiesel Sector in India, however, presents a different picture. It shows that biodiesel promotion in India was divided into two phases: Phase 1) — Research and Demonstration  with a focused plantation in wastelands and the Phase 2 as the implementation phase for large-scale uptake.

This was decided to be achieved between 2003- 07 as the Phase 1 and 2007 — 2012 as the Phase 2. A 20 per cent biodiesel blending target was decided to be achieved by the end of Phase 2 in 2012. The mission started systematically, involving several universities, research institutions to work on plant varieties, feedstock quality and also engaged Oil Marketing Companies to ensure the procurement of biodiesel

at an assured price. By 2007, almost 7,00,000 ha of wasteland was brought under Jatropha cultivation, which was however, less to meet the 20 Per cent biodiesel blending target.

However, the biodiesel mission could not scale up due to a lack of yield certainty, quality of feedstocks across locations and a shortage of feedstocks and their transmission across the value chain of the biodiesel feedstock value chain. The procurement of biodiesel also did not happen in spite of a mandated policy push and announced biodiesel procurement prices. By  August 2008, the mission was abandoned. Subsequently, a new policy was brought in to create biodiesel production from all sorts of non-edible feedstocks with multiple varying agro-climatic conditions.

In India, 400 varieties of oilseed-bearing plants have been identified with oil generation capacity. However, Jatropha was chosen as it needed less irrigation, was non interfering with the agricultural harvests, needed less gestation period for full yield maximisation by 6 years and is pest-resistant and not grased by cattle. However, despite of all these advantages, biodiesel gradually went to the back seat and almost became like a sub-altern in the space of multiple protagonists within the biofuel space and vision of India.

Some of the key issues owing to which it happened are related to a non-standardisation of yield quality and level across multiple agroclimatic conditions. Often, the gestation period, yield quality were also not standardised across India and in various agro-climatic conditions of states of India.

One of the limitations also pertained to the proper documentation of the record of wastelands. Some of these wastelands are being owned by the forestry department, marginal farmers, landless labourers and rural rich farmers. The PESA Act allows the tribal people to plant jatropha in the marginal lands and forest departments can also lease their degraded lands to private entrepreneurs. Even though, ideally it seemed to be easy, this highly heterogeneous land ownership structure has not facilitated the cause of setting up a smooth biodiesel value chain.

The risk-sharing mechanism between the government, communities, farmers and enterprises needed to be worked out. In most cases, the risk sharing mechanism of access to land, feedstock production chain and possible uncertainties of the production value chain has not been defined or executed properly in various state, agro climatic contexts of States of India. Oil Marketing companies were also often not ready to procure at the declared price due to the uncertainty in the value chain of the biodiesel production.

The country needed proper institutional structures to create standardised high-quality plant varieties, information dissemination to farmers and constant feedback incorporation of the plant and seed growers into the mission implementation. In the last two decades, the hope has been given by science and technology development for creating new plant varieties with higher yields across various agro-climatic zones.

With the strong commitment of central and state Governments, efficient intermediate agencies, institutions and experiments of high-yielding plant varieties for varied agro-climatic conditions need to be built up.

A knowledge repository of the yield of plant varieties, cultivation practices, with context and location-specific minimum support prices has to be set up. All of these have to be transparently maintained, disseminated across all the stakeholders of the value chain and to the final users of the biodiesel.

In the last 22 years, since 2003, when the Mission was launched in two phases, Biodiesel has seen the rise as a protagonist and then it has also seen a phase where it has gone to be the sub-altern. However, with the learning accumulated in the last 22 years and with the reduction of the new blending targets, the role of the state, enterprises and multiple agents within the biodiesel sector value chain has become clear. It has become clearer that if implemented properly with adequate, transparent regulations of the feedstock and biodiesel production value chain and its pricing, the sector can grow by attracting private players. However, the necessary conditions behind this deal with the formation of efficient institutions and regulatory structures and processes, which can facilitate the mobilisation of land, development of suitable plant varieties, creation of incentives for the stakeholders under different value chain organisations.

If done properly, as per a 2021 study, biodiesel sector with a movement towards 20 per cent blending can lead to the potential of 14.45 million sustainable entrepreneurship creation with a primary focus on micro and small entrepreneurs. It can also create jobs for 331.17 days for unskilled and semi-skilled people. This can only happen if the biodiesel production value chains are minimised, with minimum support prices of seeds and yield stabilisation backed by the centre and the states.

Further, an ADB working paper using Computable General Equilibrium Model shows that an expansion of biodiesel sector without hinging on land, water and food security can have a beneficial impact on household welfare, other sectors of the economy, carbon emissions, rural development, and employment generation. Biodiesel sector of India can generate 0.70 per cent-

1.0 per cent one-time incremental growth with significant employment and income generation in rural areas.

Hence, it can provide an opportunity towards addressing energy security, inclusive, sustainable growth towards Viksit Bharat 2047 within India. It can only happen if the constraints are minimised. Minimisation of such a constraint can improve the economic conditions of rural wage earners. However, the catch is that such an outcome can only be achieved with proper land allocation, land rights, tenures, high yielding seed varieties in different agroeconomic conditions and practices.

This has to be backed up by real time technology driven information dissemination, with reduction of institutional failures and biodiesel market development. A sound public policy of India towards Bioeconomic Industrialisation to make Viksit Bharat cannot ignore “The Sub Altern” — “Biodiesel” Sector anymore to become a protagonist of India’s Biofuel Story in the long term!

Anandajit Goswami is Research Lead, Senior Research Fellow, Ashoka Centre For People Centric Energy Transition, Professor, Advisor, MRIIRS and Sanjib Pohit is Professor, National Council of Applied Economic Research. Views are personal.