Suchergebnisse

Since the beginning of the 21st century, bioeconomy development has gained increasing attention across the globe, both in academia and in the political arena. Attracted by its potential of decoupling economic growth from fossil resource use and carbon emission, many countries and international organizations have set up strategies promoting bioeconomy transition. To date, one of the most controversial topics in academic debates is whether the bioeconomy transition will necessarily lead to a more sustainable future. However, these debates seem not to extend to the political sphere. The bioeconomy transition is mostly described as an overarching solution to reconcile economic, ecological and social goals with one package. In Finland, the first national strategy with the theme of the bioeconomy was published in 2014. In this thesis, I seek to ponder whether, in accordance with the political framings, we can firmly believe that bioeconomy can truly contribute to a sustainable future. The aim is to study: how is the idea of sustainable development discursively integrated, constructed and communicated to the public in the Finnish Bioeconomy Strategy? To answer this research question, I use the argumentative turn approach to policy analysis as well as discourse analysis as analytical methods, and literature on sustainable development and sustainability as theoretical lenses. The empirical findings demonstrate that the economic dimension dominates the discourse of Finnish bioeconomy strategy. The statements about business generation and biomass exploitation accounts for the majority of sustainability-related statements throughout the whole policy paper, while the degree of integrating ecological concerns is weak. The social dimension is largely omitted. The conceptualization of sustainability in the Finnish Bioeconomy Strategy is incomplete and skewed. Second, I found the policy arguments are mainly about building favorable business environment, enhancing competitiveness, promoting technology R&D and innovation, and ensuring the availability of natural resources. The discourse of sustainable development, the discourse of ecological modernization and the discourse of neoliberalism significantly shape the policy arguments. The sustainable development discourse works to define the sustainable development in bioeconomy from a normative perspective, that is, a sustainable development based on economic growth. Further, the discourses of ecological modernization and neoliberalism work together to illustrate how to achieve such a kind of sustainable development, that is, through technology and market. Finally, I found the industrial forest-based sectors very dominant in the whole policy, and the public sector represented by the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry tends to stand on their side. Based on the shared goals of economic growth, the dominant parties strive to grasp the economic opportunities of bioeconomy in the name of sustainable development. They proactively respond to the global challenges by argumentatively defining what they mean by sustainable bioeconomy development. They avoided tackling the fundamental conflicts between growth and planetary boundaries; rather, they adopted a "go around" strategy by framing a sustainable bioeconomy aligned with economic growth. On this basis, I provide policy recommendations. Firstly, it is urgent to abandon the obsession with economic growth that depends on overexploitation of natural resources. More focus should be put on, for instance, the circularity of resources, increasing long lifespan bio-based products, and the unproductive services that concentrate on human health and wellbeing. My second recommendation draws on the understanding that public participation is a vital component of sustainable development. I suggest that it would be beneficial to engage actors at the grass-roots level, inside and outside the traditionally powerful industries. In addition, the innovators specializing on bio-based health care solutions, and the non-resource-based service providers should be given more support through the upcoming strategy and implementing programmes. Moreover, I suggest that more channels could be established to initiate public discussion. In addition to the positive sides of bioeconomy, the potential risks and challenges should be openly discussed as well. Opening discussion space is the way to absorb knowledges produced by farmers and forest owners, to listen citizen's needs and meanings, and eventually to arouse enthusiasm for public participation.

"The transition from a mineral dependent economy to one in which biogenic resources form the basis of biobased products and production processes relies both on scientific innovative knowledge and on the capacity of agricultural, aquacultural, and forestry ecosystems to deliver biomass for food and non-food uses. Agricultural policy is expected to play a critical role in facilitating such a transition, being one of the few highly harmonized EU policies, with a substantial budget and a strong experience base. Within the EU, the question often raised is twofold: to what extent the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) shapes alternative pathways to sustainable bioeconomy transition, and conversely how bioeconomy development is paving the way for new potential areas for reform of the CAP and related research challenges. This also brings in the topic of coordination between the CAP and the EU bioeconomy strategy. The demand of biomass for non-food uses further intensifies agricultural activity. The need to reduce land footprints strengthens the call for smart and innovative approaches, beyond the traditional ways of producing and consuming biomass, and therefore beyond traditional land use patterns. Targeting sustainable bioeconomy development is the object of a multi-policy landscape. In this landscape, policy coherence is a key topic; its achievement is attempted through strategic documents encompassing the main relevant policy areas and authorities. Built on the original strategic guidelines and experience acquired since 2012, the updated European Bioeconomy Strategy (European Commission [EC], 2018) advocates the deployment of circular and sustainable supply chains. Integral to this is the adoption of the cascading principle, defined as using biomass as an input first, then recovering its energy content at its end-of life, and promoting the development of biorefineries that focus on high value products and organic waste re-use."--First page. ; Stelios Rozakis (Technical University of Crete, Greece, Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation (IUNG-PIB), Poland), Davide Viaggi (University of Bologna, Italy), Wieslaw Oleszek (Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation (IUNG-PIB), Poland) ; Includes bibliographical references

In recent years there has been increasing attention to the transition toward a bioeconomy. From comparable transitions toward sustainability, we know that transitions require integral, inclusive approaches toward developing a long-term strategy, focusing not only on technological innovation, but also on involving the public. This is not easy. Public engagement encompasses diverse forms of public and civil society participation, and it is crucial to understand the specificities of these interactions and their effects on potential transition pathways. We present a conceptual-analytical paper where the focus lies on understanding sense-making practices in the construction of publics in the bioeconomy. Using a case-study approach, this article describes five partialities of the constructed public in the bioeconomy and analyzes the orchestration, productive dimensions and effects of these constructions. Our analysis offers a new perspective on, and appreciation of, the partiality of different forms of public participation, and varying degrees in which possibilities of system change in the bioeconomy transition are inclusive or exclusive toward differentially constructed publics. This offers an alternative, constructive way of exploring actor dynamics and politics in system change. We aim to contribute to a more nuanced and integral interpretation of public engagement in sustainability transitions, which is relevant to actors from academia, policy, industry and other spheres relevant to the bioeconomy transition.

Bioeconomy is a concept increasingly used to circumscribe that part of the economy which depends on the utilisation of biomass. Recent empirical analyses of the European Union bioeconomies have adopted a definition of bioeconomy which also encompasses activities in &ldquo ; hybrid&rdquo ; sectors ; inputs for these sectors include not only biomass, but also a relevant share of other materials. We use the same definition to assess the features and evolution of the bioeconomy in Norway. The Norwegian bioeconomy is complex, both in terms of sectoral composition and of technological development. Our analysis builds upon national statistics on value added and employment as well as on expert interviews, aimed at detecting Norway&rsquo ; s peculiarities in terms of biomass utilisation. We find that the Norwegian bioeconomy has strongly increased its productivity in recent years. An astonishingly high peak in productivity is registered for fishing and aquaculture, whose value added has evolved massively ; at the same time, pharmaceuticals are experiencing a dramatic shift toward bio-based production. General trends in the country&rsquo ; s bioeconomy have thus emerged from different transformation pathways across sectors. Our empirical analysis leads to formulating a general reflection about the definition of bioeconomy and its implications for socioeconomic quantitative studies.

Bioeconomy is a concept increasingly used to circumscribe that part of the economy which depends on the utilisation of biomass. Recent empirical analyses of the European Union bioeconomies have adopted a definition of bioeconomy which also encompasses activities in "hybrid" sectors; inputs for these sectors include not only biomass, but also a relevant share of other materials. We use the same definition to assess the features and evolution of the bioeconomy in Norway. The Norwegian bioeconomy is complex, both in terms of sectoral composition and of technological development. Our analysis builds upon national statistics on value added and employment as well as on expert interviews, aimed at detecting Norway's peculiarities in terms of biomass utilisation. We find that the Norwegian bioeconomy has strongly increased its productivity in recent years. An astonishingly high peak in productivity is registered for fishing and aquaculture, whose value added has evolved massively; at the same time, pharmaceuticals are experiencing a dramatic shift toward bio-based production. General trends in the country's bioeconomy have thus emerged from different transformation pathways across sectors. Our empirical analysis leads to formulating a general reflection about the definition of bioeconomy and its implications for socioeconomic quantitative studies. ; publishedVersion

The bioeconomy offers solutions to urgent sustainability challenges, such as climate change, resource scarcity, and world hunger. Bioclusters, which are localized hubs of bioeconomy activities, can create synergies in the use of natural resources and new technological knowledge, thereby providing fertile ground for sustainability transitions and technological innovations in the bioeconomy. Following an interdisciplinary perspective, this dissertation adopts a multiscalar view toward bioclusters to link them with broader contexts and study their role in the bioeconomy transition. By employing quantitative and qualitative methodologies, I analyze the technological and ecological development of the French Bazancourt-Pomacle biocluster. The results reveal the dynamics and interrelations among specific scales and levels linked to positive ecological and technological outcomes, providing valuable insights for policymakers and managers aiming to advance the bioeconomy.

The bioeconomy offers solutions to urgent sustainability challenges, such as climate change, resource scarcity, and world hunger. Bioclusters, which are localized hubs of bioeconomy activities, can create synergies in the use of natural resources and new technological knowledge, thereby providing fertile ground for sustainability transitions and technological innovations in the bioeconomy. Following an interdisciplinary perspective, this dissertation adopts a multiscalar view toward bioclusters to link them with broader contexts and study their role in the bioeconomy transition. By employing quantitative and qualitative methodologies, I analyze the technological and ecological development of the French Bazancourt-Pomacle biocluster. The results reveal the dynamics and interrelations among specific scales and levels linked to positive ecological and technological outcomes, providing valuable insights for policymakers and managers aiming to advance the bioeconomy.

Over the past 10-15 years the bioeconomy has increased in importance and has been promoted as a possible contribution to address important societal challenges such as climate change, food security, and global health issues. It is argued that the development towards a circular bioeconomy can be characterised as a system change as it requires fundamental changes in both production and consumption systems (Coenen, Hansen, and Rekers 2015; Bugge, Hansen, and Klitkou 2016; Scordato, Bugge, and Fevolden 2017). However, even if governments in many countries have started to introduce policies addressing grand societal challenges, it remains unclear how policies can be implemented to achieve determined goals, and also how such policies can be understood in relation to existing policies (Kuhlmann and Rip 2014; OECD 2015; Schot and Steinmueller 2016). Still, we know very little about the extent to which policies are in fact giving sufficient importance to transformative failures (vis-à-vis market and structural failures). Also, to the extent that transformative failures are given attention in bioeconomy policies, we don't know whether this is consistent in the policy mix or only in terms of formulating visions.

In the face of energy security and climate change, and with technological advances, many industrial countries have embraced the transition to a bioeconomy – an economy based on energy, chemicals and materials obtained from biomass. However, the policy and academic discourses on a bioeconomy transition suggest growing controversy around its social, environmental and ethical impacts. In this article, we apply an epistemic forms framework to better understand the scope and extent of the bioeconomy debate. We find that industry and governments take a narrow approach to a bioeconomy and tend to view it exclusively as a technical concept. We argue that the discursive and practical dimensions of the transition would shed light on the issues of what type of a bioeconomy to strive for, through which procedures and with what impacts for diverse stakeholders. We conclude with a set of recommendations related to a bioeconomy transition.

As climate change becomes an increasing concern in European countries, the bioeconomy could challenge previous conceptualizations about how states, citizens and corporations interact in everyday practices of natural resources governance. The conceptual understanding of responsive governance of the forest-based bioeconomy is an example of this challenge and is the topic of discussion in this paper. In Finland, there are efforts to support the transition towards the bio-based economy and to reform forest governance in an attempt to respond to local circumstances while mitigating global climate change. The recent articles have address the bioeconomy concept from political discourse point of view, the citizens participation has not yet been address sufficient in the current bioeconomy discourses. In order to fill this gap, this paper provides an empirical case from Finland and connects it to the theoretical contribution of responsive bioeconomy. The paper connects the capability approach and the forest based bioeconomy in the context of Finland. And argues that citizens could have capabilities and ability to participate in decisions about matters that directly affect their well-being. However, in the case of the forest based bioeconomy, the inclusion of citizens requires an interactive collaborative approach to empower various institutions and people to meet and debate on the development of their own living environment and environmental capability (i.e those bioeconomy opportunities to achieve outcomes people value). Citizens may not be able to find solutions and create the new innovations which the bioeconomy strategy require, yet it is the citizens who will live under the changed access to opportunities and entitlements including environmental services. For this reason, responsive governance and its adaptive and interactive administration need to ensure that many change actors are taken into account as a matter of basic justice in various processes of the bioeconomy transition. Therefore key aspects of change, such as citizens' values, interests, knowhow and environmental entitlements need to be taken into account. ; published version ; peerReviewed

This book is open access under a CC BY 4.0 license. This book defines the new field of "Bioeconomy" as the sustainable and innovative use of biomass and biological knowledge to provide food, feed, industrial products, bioenergy and ecological services. The chapters highlight the importance of bioeconomy-related concepts in public, scientific, and political discourse. Using an interdisciplinary approach, the authors outline the dimensions of the bioeconomy as a means of achieving sustainability. The authors are ideally situated to elaborate on the diverse aspects of the bioeconomy. They have acquired in-depth experience of interdisciplinary research through the university's focus on "Bioeconomy", its contribution to the Bioeconomy Research Program of the federal state of Baden-Württemberg, and its participation in the German Bioeconomy Council. With the number of bioeconomy-related projects at European universities rising, this book will provide graduate students and researchers with background information on the bioeconomy. It will familiarize scientific readers with bioeconomy-related terms and give scientific background for economists, agronomists and natural scientists alike. ; Broadens your understanding of a sustainable economy Simplifies multidisciplinary approaches for the transition to a Bioeconomy Combining principles from agriculture, biotechnology and macroeconomics

The implementation of bio-economy, respectively the transition from a fossil fuel-based development to an economy that uses biological resources and innovation in biological sciences requires the formulation of new strategies and policies focused on comprehensive analyzes. The aim of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of the concept and policies of bioeconomy and to analyze citizens' behaviors and perceptions about the development of bioeconomy in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The comparative vision has the role to in identifying differences and similarities between national systems and is captured by applying a cluster analysis. The data are from European official statistics - EUROSTAT, plus data collected under Eurobarometer 88.1, from the European Commission and European Parliament. The analysis of the data shows that there are differences between the countries considered, from the perspective of the socio-economic context and also in terms of behaviors that support the bioeconomy. Further efforts are needed in the development of the bioeconomy to achieve both economic growth and employment opportunities as well as the development of behavior centered on the sustainability and resource efficiency of the resource.

The bioeconomy is a worldwide used strategy to cope with ecological, social, and economic sustainability challenges. However, we analyze current bioeconomy strategies and trends to point out potential sustainability conflicts and transition challenges. Our analysis shows that the bioeconomy is not sustainable per se, as mere input substitution may entail welfare losses. Instead, it requires further debates and actions to avoid exacerbation of ecological and social strains. Sustainability has to be the key concept behind the bioeconomy and predominantly requires (1) sustainability of the resource base and (2) sustainability of processes and products, especially by (3) circular processes of material fluxes, not least to gain consumer acceptance for bio-based products. Otherwise, the bioeconomy would only entail the substitution of fossil resources for bio-based resources potentially lacking the generation of additional societal and ecological benefits and contribution to climate mitigation. As markets alone will not suffice to fulfil this path transition towards a sustainable bioeconomy, we argue that innovative governance is necessary to reduce competitive drawbacks compared to fossil resources (enabling function) and to secure ecological, social, and economic sustainability requirements (limiting function).

By combining principles of circularity with a transition to regenerative resource usage, the 2018 European bioeconomy strategy set a new vision for the continent's sustainable development. With it, the EU Bioeconomy Monitoring System, an indicator set used to monitor the progress of the circular bioeconomy, was launched. It is the most comprehensive such tool and its conceptualization involved the collaboration of several EU member states. For a successful, synergistic and efficient transition of the European economy to a circular bioeconomy, policy and action must indeed be aligned throughout governance levels. While both the European and national efforts are reflected within the Monitoring System, it remains unclear whether national strategies and indicator sets are also suitable for urban governments to align with. As urban policy-making takes the role of implementing the bioeconomy strategies, it is vital that it does not diverge from national and international efforts, causing inefficiencies and adverse effects on the bioeconomy transition. This thesis aimed to investigate EU-wide national bioeconomy strategies and to examine the composition, features and topical coverage of their bioeconomy measuring tools. In a second step, the suitability of these tools as guidance for the development of consistent urban indicator sets was evaluated. The national bioeconomy strategies were collected and appraised through a systematic review process, and their indicator sets' forms and contents were examined. First, a factsheet and a quality appraisal of the single indicators gave insight into the construction of the indicator sets, then a heatmap of topical coverage was created showing areas of the bioeconomy tackled by the instruments. Of the 27 member states, only nine had a dedicated bioeconomy strategy, and four among them proposed an indicator set. Assessing these sets revealed that particularly the tools proposed after the issuance of the 2018 bioeconomy strategy followed indicator development standards rigorously. They also included circularity principles in their notion of bioeconomy and combined indicators for a profound and multi-faceted analysis with substantial informative and policy-relevant value. These factors strongly improve the potential for alignment and coherence with urban-level bioeconomy monitoring efforts. Nonetheless, urban governments cannot use them at face value, as the goal-setting and therefore the selection of single indicators, differs across policy levels. Although it is not the aim of national measuring tools to perfectly provide for urban needs, the findings of this thesis give insight into the importance of and ways how national bioeconomy policies can support a uniform circular bioeconomy transition across the EU.