Suchergebnisse

Drawing on contributions from more than thirty scholars and experts in the field, this book examines the role of business as an enabler, as an inhibitor, and ultimately as a co-actor in global sustainability transformations expected over the next few decades. The Role of Business in Global Sustainability Transformations employs several theoretical perspectives and provides abundant examples and cases to discuss a variety of emerging concepts, phenomena, and trends shaping business sustainability. Weaving through the chapters, the editors present core tensions and sources of inertia towards transformative change, and acknowledge that envisioning multiple solutions and pathways are possible and desirable. They advocate for the need to align visions, actions and time horizons between policy, society and business in addressing the interlinked socio-ecological challenges that our society currently faces. This book will be an important resource for scholars and professionals working in the field of sustainability and sustainable business, and a vital educational text for students interested in this discipline.

This review article examines how social science literature co-produces various imaginaries of forest-based bioeconomy transformations and pathways for reaching desired ends. Based on an analysis of 59 research articles, we find that despite a growing number of social sciences studies on the forest-based bioeconomy, much of the research tends to replicate a bioeconomy imaginary articulated in EU and national bioeconomy policies and strategies. Accordingly, the research primarily reproduces a weak approach to sustainability, which prioritize economic growth and competitiveness. Expectations are largely directed at national and regional corporate interests and forest industrial renewal, while the state has a supportive rather than restricting role. We discuss the findings against the role of social sciences, and conclude that social science scholars may adopt various strategies if interested in opening up forest-based policy debates and offer alternative imaginaries of sustainable bioeconomy transformations.

This review article examines how social science literature co-produces various imaginaries of forest-based bioeconomy transformations and pathways for reaching desired ends. Based on an analysis of 59 research articles, we find that despite a growing number of social sciences studies on the forest-based bioeconomy, much of the research tends to replicate a bioeconomy imaginary articulated in EU and national bioeconomy policies and strategies. Accordingly, the research primarily reproduces a weak approach to sustainability, which prioritize economic growth and competitiveness. Expectations are largely directed at national and regional corporate interests and forest industrial renewal, while the state has a supportive rather than restricting role. We discuss the findings against the role of social sciences, and conclude that social science scholars may adopt various strategies if interested in opening up forest-based policy debates and offer alternative imaginaries of sustainable bioeconomy transformations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s13280-020-01398-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Corregium: 10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102455 ; In line with the Sustainable Development Goals of the UN 2030 Agenda, the circular bioeconomy concept is gaining greater political momentum and research interest. A circular bioeconomy implies a more efficient resource management of bio-based renewable resources by integrating circular economy principles into the bioeconomy. These ideas have been well received at industry level since they are deemed to foster cost reductions, innovation and competitiveness. While recent scientific literature has dwelt on sustainability-related circular business models, empirical research on company-level implementation is only just emerging. Our study contributes to addressing this research lacuna by seeking answers to two questions: 1. How do small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) propose, create and deliver, and capture value through circular bioeconomy business models?; and 2. What are the business challenges and opportunities related to the operationalization of such business models? To this end, we employed content analysis on interview data gathered from managers in Finnish SME companies from the field of packaging, textiles, composite materials, cosmetics and pharmaceutical products. We outlined the main business model archetypes, and identified the key characteristics that enable value capture and delivery for various stakeholders. The contribution of this study is duly two-fold. From the perspective of a theoretical contribution, we expand and refine the conceptualization of sustainable circular bioeconomy and related business models. In addition, based on our findings, we provide insights and recommendations for researchers and policy-makers to advance the sustainability transition to a circular bioeconomy in the context of the forest-based industry, and for the management of SMEs to reflect on company viability and growth. ; Peer reviewed

The emergence of politically driven bioeconomy strategies worldwide calls for considering the ecological issues associated with bio-based products. Traditionally, life cycle analysis (LCA) approaches are key tools used to assess impacts through product life cycles, but they present limitations regarding the accounting of multiple ecosystem service-related issues, at both the land-use and supply chain levels. Based on a systematic review of empirical articles, this study provides insights on using LCA assessments to account for ecosystem service-related impacts in the context of bioeconomy activities. We address the following research questions: what is the state of the art of the literature performing LCA assessments of forest-based bioeconomy activities, including the temporal distribution, the geographic areas and products/processes at study, and the approaches and methods used? 2. Which impacts and related midpoints are considered by the reviewed studies and what types of ecosystem service- related information do they bear? Out of over 600 articles found through the Scopus search, 155 were deemed relevant for the review. The literature focuses on North-America and Europe. Most of the articles assessed the environmental impact of lower-value biomass uses. Climate change was assessed in over 90% of the studies, while issues related to ozone, eutrophication, human toxicity, resource depletion, acidification, and environmental toxicity were assessed in 40% to 60% of the studies. While the impact categories accounted for in the reviewed LCA studies bear information relevant to certain provisioning and regulating services, several ecosystem services (especially cultural ones) remain unaccounted for. The implications of our study are relevant for professionals working in the ecosystem services, circular bioeconomy, and/or LCA communities. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. ; Peer reviewed

Correction: Early Access FEB 2022 10.1007/s13280-022-01713-3 ; This review article examines how social science literature co-produces various imaginaries of forest-based bioeconomy transformations and pathways for reaching desired ends. Based on an analysis of 59 research articles, we find that despite a growing number of social sciences studies on the forest-based bioeconomy, much of the research tends to replicate a bioeconomy imaginary articulated in EU and national bioeconomy policies and strategies. Accordingly, the research primarily reproduces a weak approach to sustainability, which prioritize economic growth and competitiveness. Expectations are largely directed at national and regional corporate interests and forest industrial renewal, while the state has a supportive rather than restricting role. We discuss the findings against the role of social sciences, and conclude that social science scholars may adopt various strategies if interested in opening up forest-based policy debates and offer alternative imaginaries of sustainable bioeconomy transformations. ; Peer reviewed

Interest in issues surrounding sustainable production-consumption systems and alternatives to fossil fuels is booming. The circular bioeconomy is currently mainstreamed in policy-making, industry and academia as an important part of the solution to the climate crisis and towards the creation of more sustainable economies. Based on the University-level teaching and research experience of the four authors in Italy, Finland, and France, this textbook fills an important gap in the literature by providing an in-depth and unique guide to the circular bioeconomy. The chapters critically discuss the potential contribution of a circular bioeconomy to fostering societal and organizational transformations towards sustainability globally. This timely book joins a suite of important new titles on sustainability, environmental and ecological economics.

The continuous emergence of new ideas and terms simultaneously enables and impedes the advancement of sustainability, because of an increasingly complex conceptual landscape. This study aims at highlighting combinations of sustainability concepts (circular, green and bioeconomy) and of development models (growth, steady-state, degrowth) which selected researchers have considered priorities for pursuing sustainability transformations. Thirteen leading scholars working on sustainability issues were asked to rank 36 statements describing activities related to either circular, green, bio, growth, steady-state or degrowth economy. Using Q methodology, an exploratory approach to the identification of shared or diverging opinions, three archetypical perspectives were identified across the respondents: 1. circular solutions towards economic-environmental decoupling in a degrowth perspective; 2. a mix of circular and green economy solutions; 3. a green economy perspective, with an emphasis on natural capital and ecosystem services, and critical towards growth. Economic growth was perceived negatively across all perspectives, in contrast to the current lack of political and societal support for degrowth ideas. Neither did bioeconomy-oriented activities have support among the participating researchers, even though half of the respondents were working with bioeconomy issues, which are currently high on the political agenda. The lack of support for pro-growth and bioeconomy solutions are unexpected results given the current political discourses. While the results are not to be generalised beyond the sample, they provide valuable orientation for emerging and under-investigated research and policy directions. If bioeconomy policies are to be implemented on a broader scale, it seems worthwhile evaluating the acceptability of the bioeconomy agenda among various societal actors. Furthermore, our results point to the (still under-explored) potential of formulating synergic circular, green and bioeconomy policies, possibly without a focus on economic growth. ; Peer reviewed

Transdisciplinary research often utilizes collaborative ways of knowledge production to enable deliberate transformations towards sustainability. Multiple concepts with varying definitions are applied, leading to confusion in the aims and uses of these concepts. In this article, we review five concepts relevant to the current debate on the new collaborative ways of knowledge production in transdisciplinary research. We focus on the concepts of co-creation, co-production, co-design, co-learning, and adaptive co-management in the context of natural resources management (NRM). This study couples a literature review and a conceptual analysis, and aims to clarify definitions, use, the interlinkages of these concepts and to shed light on their intertwined nature. We propose an integrative understanding of the concepts to facilitate collaborative modes and to enable the transformative aims of research processes. To this end, we discuss how to harvest the transformative potential of the "co-concepts" by focusing on reflexivity, power analysis and process orientation. ; publishedVersion ; Peer reviewed

Background. To meet increasing demand for forest products and services, the global area of planted forests has increased dramatically over the past 25 years. Further increases in large-scale tree plantations are expected due to their high productivity, economic profitability and contribution to climate change mitigation targets. This raises questions about their long-term sustainability, as well as their impacts on forest ecosystem services and local livelihoods, particularly in countries characterized by rural poverty and insecure property rights. Previous studies have revealed mixed impacts, but there is a lack of research on the contexts and practices that can contribute to positive and/or negative socioeconomic impacts. This protocol provides guidelines for a systematic review that synthesizes the current literature on the direct and indirect impacts of large-scale plantations on local communities, and which will also identify trends, bias and gaps in the empirical evidence base. Methods. The primary research question of the systematic review asks "What are the direct and indirect socioeconomic impacts of large-scale tree plantations on local human populations?" We apply a Population-Exposure-Comparator-Outcome-Context (PECOC) framework to structure each stage of the systematic review, which comprises a comprehensive literature search, screening, quality assessment, data extraction and analysis.We define the exposure of interest to be the establishment or management of a large-scale tree plantation by external actors, population of interest as households and communities living in close proximity to plantation sites, comparators as other communities who have not experienced the same exposure as well as the same communities prior to plantation establishment, outcomes as the direct or indirect socioeconomic impacts felt by the population as a result of plantation establishment, and context as the social, political and environmental factors that may have led to differences in experienced impacts. We will search multiple bibliographic databases and organizational websites for relevant studies in both the published and grey literatures. These results will be screened by their titles and abstracts followed by their full texts based on predetermined eligibility criteria. To ensure that selected studies have controlled for potential biases, quality assessment will then take place alongside data extraction. Finally, the results of quantitative and qualitative analyses will be reported in a narrative synthesis.

The political project on bioeconomy strives to address multiple societal aspirations, namely combine economic growth with environmental sustainability in some socially acceptable manner. The contradictions between the goals and the concrete plans to increase production, processing, and consumption of forest biomass in Europe have however raised sustainability concerns within and beyond its borders. While political actors articulate such contradictions differently and compete for traction for their viewpoints in the public discourse, little is known about how citizens of urban areas perceive this discourse. Conceptualising perception as a multidimensional construct, data from eight European university cities (Bordeaux, Bratislava, Freiburg, Helsinki, Padua, St. Petersburg, Uppsala, Vienna) are statistically analysed to explore its dimensions, the communities of like-minded citizens forming across those dimensions, and the traits associating with membership in each such community. Five communities across six dimensions from biocentrism through distributional aspects to adherence to political goals are identified: adherent-environmentalist, adherent-governmentalist, critical-reformist, critical-agriculturalist, and indifferent. City of residence and perceived familiarity with bioeconomy clearly interact with perception. There is however considerable variation in communities within and across the eight cities, suggesting deeper social tension beyond the public discourse. Much of the within-community variation remains unexplained, though, calling for more work locally. Implications for forest policy are derived. ; Peer reviewed