|
|
A grouping of activities, defined by the European Commission as ‘all sectors and systems that rely on biological resources – animals, plants, micro-organisms and derived biomass, including organic waste – as well as their functions and principles’. This paper considers only land-based bioeconomy activities.
|
|
|
Materials are ‘substances or compounds… used as inputs to production or manufacturing because of their properties. A material can be defined at different stages of its life cycle: unprocessed (or raw) materials, intermediate materials and finished materials.’
|
|
|
Materials or products that ‘mainly consist of a substance (or substances) derived from living matter (biomass) and either occur naturally or are synthesized, or it may refer to products made by processes that use biomass’.
|
|
|
Transition is defined as the act of shifting one state (economic, environmental or social) to another. In this paper, the bioeconomy transition is used to describe a shift from a fossil fuel-based production and economic system to a bio-based one in a manner that has an overall positive impact for the environment or society.
|
|
|
The act of introducing new methods, ideas or processes into established ways of doing something. It includes both technological innovation and social innovation.
|
|
|
‘The circular economy is a system where materials never become waste and nature is regenerated. In a circular economy, products and materials are kept in circulation through processes like maintenance, reuse, refurbishment, remanufacture, recycling, and composting.’
|
Source: Compiled by the authors.
A transition to a bioeconomic model could have massive consequences for the global labour market, trade and geopolitics, as countries with large biological resources operate with more influence in the global economy and private sector actors pivot to bio-based business models.
If the global economy shifts away from fossil fuels, the political power of major oil-producing countries could wane and re-emerge in a different group of countries endowed with land, nature and other types of natural resources.
But little is known about the range of environmental or social impacts that are possible should countries and policymakers pursue bioeconomies to different extents, or if there is even enough land or other natural resources available to support a bio-based economic transition globally and in contained geographies.
The potential for strategic decision-making by policymakers and industry leaders within and across bioeconomy sectors is currently hampered by poor knowledge flows, siloed approaches to innovations within energy, food and material systems, and fragmented platforms to debate these issues.
At this early stage of transition, there is an onus on leaders in business and policy to create the conditions for bioeconomies to grow that materially reduce emissions, protect biodiversity and do not perpetuate extractive resource models. Poor decision-making and investment planning could lead to a transition that drives further resource extraction and competition, negative environmental impacts as well as social economic disparity, instead of a socio-economic pathway based on renewable, circular and bio-based principles.
This paper highlights how collaboration could aid decision-making in policy and business circles, focusing on sectors of the bioeconomy that impact supply chains of materials as an under-investigated area of research with a large climate impact.
The paper examines trends that could affect the trajectory of bioeconomies, it then provides recommendations on ways forward. The paper includes a theoretical preliminary analysis that models three archetypal bioeconomy innovations – alternative proteins, bioplastics and cross-laminated timber (CLT) – to highlight the emerging synergies, resource competition and potential trade-offs between these innovations, and to identify gaps in strategic decision-making capacity.
