Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates
Over the last decade, bioeconomy policies, guided by integrated bioeconomy strategies, have developed. This paper presents a systematic and comparative analysis of official bioeconomy strategies of the EU, Germany, OECD, Sweden and the USA with regard to their context, visions and guiding implementa...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Sustainability 2017-06, Vol.9 (6), p.1031 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1031 |
container_title | Sustainability |
container_volume | 9 |
creator | Meyer, Rolf |
description | Over the last decade, bioeconomy policies, guided by integrated bioeconomy strategies, have developed. This paper presents a systematic and comparative analysis of official bioeconomy strategies of the EU, Germany, OECD, Sweden and the USA with regard to their context, visions and guiding implementation principles. In an additional step, the relationship between these strategies and important scientific and societal debates around bioeconomy is assessed. In conclusion, five major stumbling blocks for the further development of the bioeconomy are worked out. First, there is the risk of disappointment because far-reaching promises of the strategies are difficult to achieve. Second, the bioeconomy is not the only way to a low carbon economy so alternatives could impede the desired development. Third, persistent conflicts between the different uses of biomass for food, material and energy production could lead to unstable policy support with short-term shifts. Fourth, a broader success of new bioeconomy value chains could trigger new societal conflicts over bioeconomy if efficiency gains, cascading use, residue use and sustainability certification are not sufficient to ensure a sustainable supply of biomass. Fifth, the acceptance of bioeconomy could be compromised if bioeconomy policies continue to ignore the on-going societal debates on agriculture and food. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3390/su9061031 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1944309754</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1944309754</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c292t-bb2eda533e907fcc558e228749907fb8b6455bedb14c4a00def6806df6d04a2a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkFtLAzEQhYMoWGof_AcLPgmuTi57iW_aai0UFG-vS3Z3tqR0k5pkwf57UyrivMyZmY8zcAg5p3DNuYQbP0jIKXB6REYMCppSyOD4nz4lE-_XEItzKmk-IupeW2yssf0ueQtOBVxp9LfJ1JqA38FfJZ_aa2uimA-61WaVLPrtBns0QYV4SF6cNo2OK58o0yav6IdN2HMzrKOdPyMnndp4nPz2Mfl4fHifPqXL5_lierdMGyZZSOuaYasyzlFC0TVNlpXIWFkIuZ_rss5FltXY1lQ0QgG02OUl5G2XtyAUU3xMLg6-W2e_BvShWtvBmfiyolIIDrLIRKQuD1TjrPcOu2rrdK_crqJQ7UOs_kLkPxbjZQk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1944309754</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates</title><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Meyer, Rolf</creator><creatorcontrib>Meyer, Rolf</creatorcontrib><description>Over the last decade, bioeconomy policies, guided by integrated bioeconomy strategies, have developed. This paper presents a systematic and comparative analysis of official bioeconomy strategies of the EU, Germany, OECD, Sweden and the USA with regard to their context, visions and guiding implementation principles. In an additional step, the relationship between these strategies and important scientific and societal debates around bioeconomy is assessed. In conclusion, five major stumbling blocks for the further development of the bioeconomy are worked out. First, there is the risk of disappointment because far-reaching promises of the strategies are difficult to achieve. Second, the bioeconomy is not the only way to a low carbon economy so alternatives could impede the desired development. Third, persistent conflicts between the different uses of biomass for food, material and energy production could lead to unstable policy support with short-term shifts. Fourth, a broader success of new bioeconomy value chains could trigger new societal conflicts over bioeconomy if efficiency gains, cascading use, residue use and sustainability certification are not sufficient to ensure a sustainable supply of biomass. Fifth, the acceptance of bioeconomy could be compromised if bioeconomy policies continue to ignore the on-going societal debates on agriculture and food.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/su9061031</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Agriculture ; Biomass ; Biomass energy production ; Comparative analysis ; Conflicts ; Councils ; Food ; Food production ; Innovations ; Principles ; Sustainability ; Technological change ; Value analysis</subject><ispartof>Sustainability, 2017-06, Vol.9 (6), p.1031</ispartof><rights>Copyright MDPI AG 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c292t-bb2eda533e907fcc558e228749907fb8b6455bedb14c4a00def6806df6d04a2a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c292t-bb2eda533e907fcc558e228749907fb8b6455bedb14c4a00def6806df6d04a2a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1243-5322</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Meyer, Rolf</creatorcontrib><title>Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates</title><title>Sustainability</title><description>Over the last decade, bioeconomy policies, guided by integrated bioeconomy strategies, have developed. This paper presents a systematic and comparative analysis of official bioeconomy strategies of the EU, Germany, OECD, Sweden and the USA with regard to their context, visions and guiding implementation principles. In an additional step, the relationship between these strategies and important scientific and societal debates around bioeconomy is assessed. In conclusion, five major stumbling blocks for the further development of the bioeconomy are worked out. First, there is the risk of disappointment because far-reaching promises of the strategies are difficult to achieve. Second, the bioeconomy is not the only way to a low carbon economy so alternatives could impede the desired development. Third, persistent conflicts between the different uses of biomass for food, material and energy production could lead to unstable policy support with short-term shifts. Fourth, a broader success of new bioeconomy value chains could trigger new societal conflicts over bioeconomy if efficiency gains, cascading use, residue use and sustainability certification are not sufficient to ensure a sustainable supply of biomass. Fifth, the acceptance of bioeconomy could be compromised if bioeconomy policies continue to ignore the on-going societal debates on agriculture and food.</description><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Biomass energy production</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Conflicts</subject><subject>Councils</subject><subject>Food</subject><subject>Food production</subject><subject>Innovations</subject><subject>Principles</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Technological change</subject><subject>Value analysis</subject><issn>2071-1050</issn><issn>2071-1050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkFtLAzEQhYMoWGof_AcLPgmuTi57iW_aai0UFG-vS3Z3tqR0k5pkwf57UyrivMyZmY8zcAg5p3DNuYQbP0jIKXB6REYMCppSyOD4nz4lE-_XEItzKmk-IupeW2yssf0ueQtOBVxp9LfJ1JqA38FfJZ_aa2uimA-61WaVLPrtBns0QYV4SF6cNo2OK58o0yav6IdN2HMzrKOdPyMnndp4nPz2Mfl4fHifPqXL5_lierdMGyZZSOuaYasyzlFC0TVNlpXIWFkIuZ_rss5FltXY1lQ0QgG02OUl5G2XtyAUU3xMLg6-W2e_BvShWtvBmfiyolIIDrLIRKQuD1TjrPcOu2rrdK_crqJQ7UOs_kLkPxbjZQk</recordid><startdate>20170615</startdate><enddate>20170615</enddate><creator>Meyer, Rolf</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1243-5322</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20170615</creationdate><title>Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates</title><author>Meyer, Rolf</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c292t-bb2eda533e907fcc558e228749907fb8b6455bedb14c4a00def6806df6d04a2a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Biomass energy production</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Conflicts</topic><topic>Councils</topic><topic>Food</topic><topic>Food production</topic><topic>Innovations</topic><topic>Principles</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Technological change</topic><topic>Value analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Meyer, Rolf</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Meyer, Rolf</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates</atitle><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle><date>2017-06-15</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1031</spage><pages>1031-</pages><issn>2071-1050</issn><eissn>2071-1050</eissn><abstract>Over the last decade, bioeconomy policies, guided by integrated bioeconomy strategies, have developed. This paper presents a systematic and comparative analysis of official bioeconomy strategies of the EU, Germany, OECD, Sweden and the USA with regard to their context, visions and guiding implementation principles. In an additional step, the relationship between these strategies and important scientific and societal debates around bioeconomy is assessed. In conclusion, five major stumbling blocks for the further development of the bioeconomy are worked out. First, there is the risk of disappointment because far-reaching promises of the strategies are difficult to achieve. Second, the bioeconomy is not the only way to a low carbon economy so alternatives could impede the desired development. Third, persistent conflicts between the different uses of biomass for food, material and energy production could lead to unstable policy support with short-term shifts. Fourth, a broader success of new bioeconomy value chains could trigger new societal conflicts over bioeconomy if efficiency gains, cascading use, residue use and sustainability certification are not sufficient to ensure a sustainable supply of biomass. Fifth, the acceptance of bioeconomy could be compromised if bioeconomy policies continue to ignore the on-going societal debates on agriculture and food.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/su9061031</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1243-5322</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2071-1050 |
ispartof | Sustainability, 2017-06, Vol.9 (6), p.1031 |
issn | 2071-1050 2071-1050 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1944309754 |
source | MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
subjects | Agriculture Biomass Biomass energy production Comparative analysis Conflicts Councils Food Food production Innovations Principles Sustainability Technological change Value analysis |
title | Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T14%3A40%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bioeconomy%20Strategies:%20Contexts,%20Visions,%20Guiding%20Implementation%20Principles%20and%20Resulting%20Debates&rft.jtitle=Sustainability&rft.au=Meyer,%20Rolf&rft.date=2017-06-15&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1031&rft.pages=1031-&rft.issn=2071-1050&rft.eissn=2071-1050&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/su9061031&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1944309754%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1944309754&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |