International Consultation on Pro-Poor Jatropha Development IFAD, Rome, April 10-11, 2008 Foundation Perspectives on Financing Pro-Poor Jatropha Development: The Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture (SFSA) Marco Ferroni Executive Director SFSA

„Benefiting Resource-Poor Communities in Semi-Arid Areas in Developing Countries through Sustainable Innovation in Agriculture“  R&D (agronomy, genomics,...).  Feasibility assessments (technical, economic, supply chain).  Business model and partnership development.  Stakeholder analysis.  Initial implementation.  Monitoring and evaluation.  Partnering and fundraising for scaling up (incl. carbon finance). „Proof of concept“

Pre- processing/ transport Conversion Post- processing/ transport End use/ final energy vector Bioenergy Supply Routes and Technology Options Sector Forestry Agriculture Waste Supply R&D entry points Infrastructure – Refueling – Distribution Scale – Large – Medium – Small/micro Integration – Hydro – Solar thermal – Conventional R&D entry points Breeding Water use efficiency Nutrient use efficiency Environmental management Biotechnology Policy/social development Demand Technology R&D entry points 1st generation – Fermentation – Esterification – Combustion 2nd generation – Gasification – Enzymes – Catalysis (thermo) – Pyrolysis – Pelletization Sector Transport fuel Electricity Combined heat and power (CHP) Polygeneration Sector Transport fuel Electricity CHP Drying Cooking and lighting Primary production feedstocks Storage, blending, modification, additives Quality Composition Scale Logistics Preprocessing, such as drying, milling, dehusking Quality Composition Scale Logistics Source: J. Woods/IFPRI, 2006.

Large-scale bioenergy development Sugarcane to ethanol Palm/soy/jatropha to biodiesel Value added to local communities High risk Suitable for local markets Social organization issues Complex value added to local communities High risk Complex food fuel- cash-crop interactions Suitable for local markets Social organization issues Multiproduct cropping (e.g., sweet sorghum) Economics uncertain Single bioenergy product (e.g., multi-species woodlot) Small-scale bioenergy development Sweet sorghum microdistillery Woodlot gasification electricity Village-scale biogas system Little value added to local communities High export potential Smallholder-led production Higher cost base Less globally competitive Mill-owned estate Very competitive globally High value added to local communities Low export potential Small- and Large-Scale Bioenergy Development Options Source: J. Woods/IFPRI, 2006 (adapted). Jatropha

Elements of Hypothetical Pro-Poor Jatropha Project (Joint Venture): I Objectives:  Production (t of seed/year).  Processing (t of biodiesel/year).  Electricity (MWh/year), from seedcake and shells combustion.  Village energy needs (%/year).  Carbon credit generation (t CO2e).  Rural development: employment, income, energy security.

Source: Eco-Carbone (Novartis Proposal), Hypothetical Project Structure

Elements of Hypothetical Pro-Poor Jatropha Project (Joint Venture): II Business plan and financing:  Yield and production target.  Availability of inputs.  Processing capability.  Community (bio)diesel needs.  Partnership with biodiesel buyer.  Partnership with electricity producer.  Capitalizing on byproducts/glycerine.  Partnership with NGO/rural development.  Start-up funding; „patient capital“, link up with credit programs.  Training, capacity building.

Bioenergy and Rural Development  While food / fuel / cash crop / off- farm employment interactions are complex, value creation from biofuels in smallholder communities seems possible.  For an entity such as SFSA, biofuels thus are a potential area of intervention that cannot be ignored.