IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gjagec/270182.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Political Economy of Fostering a Wood-based Bioeconomy in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Pannicke, Nadine
  • Gawe, Erik
  • Hagemann, Nina
  • Purkus, Alexandra
  • Strunz, Sebastian

Abstract

To increase the sustainability of economic processes and products as well as the use of sustainable resource inputs, a transition is required from the hitherto predominantly fossil resource-based “throughput economy” towards a circular flow economy based on renewable resources, the so-called bioeconomy. This paper considers the transition challenge from the perspective of dynamic theories on lock-in effects and lock-out options. Within this framework, a successful transition requires a twofold equilibrium: the economic sustainability equilibrium and a corresponding political equilibrium providing the corresponding transition policies. Based on the positive analysis of both current bioeconomy policies and policy demand by bioeconomy actors in Germany, this paper develops recommendations on how a political equilibrium may be achieved which favors a sustainability-oriented transformation to a bioeconomy. One means of doing so, for example, is to combine a gradual development of existing policies with efforts to identify and support innovative niche products and processes. Zur Erhöhung der Nachhaltigkeit ökonomischer Prozesse und Produkte sowie der Nutzung nachhaltiger Produktionsinputs bedarf es einer Transformation von der derzeitigen fossilen „Durchflussökonomie“ hin zu einer Kreislaufwirtschaft basierend auf erneuerbaren Ressourcen, der sogenannten Bioökonomie. Das vorliegende Papier betrachtet die Transformationsherausforderung aus Sicht dynamischer Theorien zu Lock-in-Problemen und Lock-out-Optionen unter Hinzuziehung von Ansätzen zum institutionellen Wandel und Innovationssystemen. Es wird gezeigt, dass zur Transformation ein doppeltes Gleichgewicht vorliegen muss: ein ökonomisches Nachhaltigkeitsgleichgewicht auf abweichendem Entwicklungspfad und ein politisches Gleichgewicht, das die dazu nötigen Transformationspolitiken bereitstellt. Basierend auf der positiven Analyse des gegenwärtigen Angebots an „Bioökonomie-Politiken“ und der Nachfrage danach durch relevante Bioökonomie-Akteure in Deutschland werden in diesem Papier Vorschläge ausgearbeitet, wie auch politisch ein neues Gleichgewicht zugunsten von Transformationspolitiken erreicht werden kann, etwa durch graduelle Entwicklung bereits bestehender Politiken sowie die Identifizierung und Förderung innovativer Nischenprodukte und -prozesse.

Suggested Citation

  • Pannicke, Nadine & Gawe, Erik & Hagemann, Nina & Purkus, Alexandra & Strunz, Sebastian, 2015. "The Political Economy of Fostering a Wood-based Bioeconomy in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 64(04), December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gjagec:270182
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.270182
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270182/files/2_Pannicke.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270182/files/2_Pannicke.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.270182?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moiseyev, Alexander & Solberg, Birger & Kallio, A. Maarit I., 2014. "The impact of subsidies and carbon pricing on the wood biomass use for energy in the EU," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 161-167.
    2. Jenkins, Jesse D., 2014. "Political economy constraints on carbon pricing policies: What are the implications for economic efficiency, environmental efficacy, and climate policy design?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 467-477.
    3. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    4. Unruh, Gregory C., 2002. "Escaping carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 317-325, March.
    5. Isermeyer, Folkhard & Zimmer, Yelto, 2006. "Thesen zur Bioenergie-Politik in Deutschland," Arbeitsberichte aus der vTI-Agrarökonomie 02/2006, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    6. Dewatripont, Mathias & Roland, Gerard, 1995. "The Design of Reform Packages under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1207-1223, December.
    7. George J. Stigler, 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 3-21, Spring.
    8. Pannicke, Nadine & Hagemann, Nina & Purkus, Alexandra & Gawel, Erik, 2015. "Gesellschaftliche Grundfragen der Bioökonomie: Volkswirtschaftliche Mehrwerte und Nachhaltigkeitsherausforderungen einer biobasierten Wirtschaft," UFZ Discussion Papers 7/2015, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    9. Harvey, Mark & Pilgrim, Sarah, 2011. "The new competition for land: Food, energy, and climate change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 40-51.
    10. Martin Weiss & Juliane Haufe & Michael Carus & Miguel Brandão & Stefan Bringezu & Barbara Hermann & Martin K. Patel, 2012. "A Review of the Environmental Impacts of Biobased Materials," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(s1), pages 169-181, April.
    11. Fischer, Carolyn & Newell, Richard G., 2008. "Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 142-162, March.
    12. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7073 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Hongbin Cheng & Hongbin Cheng & Hongbin Cheng & Lei Wang, 2013. "Lignocelluloses Feedstock Biorefinery as Petrorefinery Substitutes," Chapters, in: Miodrag Darko Matovic (ed.), Biomass Now - Sustainable Growth and Use, IntechOpen.
    14. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    15. Kangas, Hanna-Liisa & Lintunen, Jussi & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2009. "The cofiring problem of a power plant under policy regulations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1898-1904, May.
    16. Brousseau, Eric & Garrouste, Pierre & Raynaud, Emmanuel, 2011. "Institutional changes: Alternative theories and consequences for institutional design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 3-19.
    17. Harvey, Mark & Pilgrim, Sarah, 2011. "The new competition for land: Food, energy, and climate change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 40-51, January.
    18. Scarlat, Nicolae & Dallemand, Jean-François, 2011. "Recent developments of biofuels/bioenergy sustainability certification: A global overview," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1630-1646, March.
    19. McCann, Laura, 2013. "Transaction costs and environmental policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 253-262.
    20. Paul Lehmann & Felix Creutzig & Melf-Hinrich Ehlers & Nele Friedrichsen & Clemens Heuson & Lion Hirth & Robert Pietzcker, 2012. "Carbon Lock-Out: Advancing Renewable Energy Policy in Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-32, February.
    21. Louise Staffas & Mathias Gustavsson & Kes McCormick, 2013. "Strategies and Policies for the Bioeconomy and Bio-Based Economy: An Analysis of Official National Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-19, June.
    22. Schmidt, Robert C. & Marschinski, Robert, 2009. "A model of technological breakthrough in the renewable energy sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 435-444, December.
    23. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    24. Unruh, Gregory C., 2000. "Understanding carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 817-830, October.
    25. Schubert, Renate & Blasch, Julia, 2010. "Sustainability standards for bioenergy--A means to reduce climate change risks?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2797-2805, June.
    26. Pacini, Henrique & Assunção, Lucas & van Dam, Jinke & Toneto, Rudinei, 2013. "The price for biofuels sustainability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 898-903.
    27. Kalt, Joseph P & Zupan, Mark A, 1984. "Capture and Ideology in the Economic Theory of Politics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 279-300, June.
    28. Charles Perrings & David Stern, 2000. "Modelling Loss of Resilience in Agroecosystems: Rangelands in Botswana," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(2), pages 185-210, June.
    29. Kes McCormick & Niina Kautto, 2013. "The Bioeconomy in Europe: An Overview," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-20, June.
    30. Jeffrey Rohlfs, 1974. "A Theory of Interdependent Demand for a Communications Service," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 5(1), pages 16-37, Spring.
    31. Strunz, Sebastian, 2014. "The German energy transition as a regime shift," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 150-158.
    32. Shang-Jin Wei, 1997. "Gradualism versus Big Bang: Speed and Sustainability of Reforms," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 30(4), pages 1234-1247, November.
    33. Schneider, Friedrich & Volkert, Juergen, 1999. "No chance for incentive-oriented environmental policies in representative democracies? A Public Choice analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 123-138, October.
    34. Jeroen Bergh & Giorgos Kallis, 2013. "A survey of evolutionary policy: normative and positive dimensions," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 281-303, October.
    35. Braun, Marcel, 2009. "The evolution of emissions trading in the European Union - The role of policy networks, knowledge and policy entrepreneurs," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3-4), pages 469-487, April.
    36. Gary S. Becker, 1983. "A Theory of Competition Among Pressure Groups for Political Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(3), pages 371-400.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Viaggi, Davide, 2018. "Towards an economics of the bioeconomy: four years later," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 5(2), September.
    2. Nina Hagemann & Erik Gawel & Alexandra Purkus & Nadine Pannicke & Jennifer Hauck, 2016. "Possible Futures towards a Wood-Based Bioeconomy: A Scenario Analysis for Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Alexandra Gottinger & Luana Ladu & Rainer Quitzow, 2020. "Studying the Transition towards a Circular Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Transition Studies and Existing Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    4. Thomas Dietz & Jan Börner & Jan Janosch Förster & Joachim Von Braun, 2018. "Governance of the Bioeconomy: A Global Comparative Study of National Bioeconomy Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    5. Valeria Ferreira Gregorio & Laia Pié & Antonio Terceño, 2018. "A Systematic Literature Review of Bio, Green and Circular Economy Trends in Publications in the Field of Economics and Business Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-39, November.
    6. Manuel Hafner & Lukas Fehr & Jan Springorum & Artur Petkau & Reinhard Johler, 2020. "Perceptions of Bioeconomy and the Desire for Governmental Action: Regional Actors’ Connotations of Wood-Based Bioeconomy in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-13, November.
    7. Fabiana Gatto & Ilaria Re, 2021. "Circular Bioeconomy Business Models to Overcome the Valley of Death. A Systematic Statistical Analysis of Studies and Projects in Emerging Bio-Based Technologies and Trends Linked to the SME Instrumen," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-40, February.
    8. Erik Gawel & Nadine Pannicke & Nina Hagemann, 2019. "A Path Transition Towards a Bioeconomy—The Crucial Role of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, May.
    9. Grit Ludwig, 2019. "The Role of Law in Transformative Environmental Policies—A Case Study of “Timber in Buildings Construction in Germany”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, February.
    10. Wesseler, Justus & Banse, Martin & Zilberman, David, 2015. "Introduction Special Issue “The Political Economy of the Bioeconomy”," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 64(04), December.
    11. Giurca, Alexandru, 2020. "Unpacking the network discourse: Actors and storylines in Germany's wood-based bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    12. Pannicke, Nadine & Hagemann, Nina & Purkus, Alexandra & Gawel, Erik, 2015. "Gesellschaftliche Grundfragen der Bioökonomie: Volkswirtschaftliche Mehrwerte und Nachhaltigkeitsherausforderungen einer biobasierten Wirtschaft," UFZ Discussion Papers 7/2015, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    13. G. Venkatesh, 2022. "Circular Bio-economy—Paradigm for the Future: Systematic Review of Scientific Journal Publications from 2015 to 2021," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    14. Margarida Casau & Marta Ferreira Dias & João C. O. Matias & Leonel J. R. Nunes, 2022. "Residual Biomass: A Comprehensive Review on the Importance, Uses and Potential in a Circular Bioeconomy Approach," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nina Hagemann & Erik Gawel & Alexandra Purkus & Nadine Pannicke & Jennifer Hauck, 2016. "Possible Futures towards a Wood-Based Bioeconomy: A Scenario Analysis for Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Erik Gawel & Nadine Pannicke & Nina Hagemann, 2019. "A Path Transition Towards a Bioeconomy—The Crucial Role of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Paul Lehmann & Jos Sijm & Erik Gawel & Sebastian Strunz & Unnada Chewpreecha & Jean-Francois Mercure & Hector Pollitt, 2019. "Addressing multiple externalities from electricity generation: a case for EU renewable energy policy beyond 2020?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 21(2), pages 255-283, April.
    4. Purkus, Alexandra & Gawel, Erik & Thrän, Daniela, 2012. "Bioenergy governance between market and government failures: A new institutional economics perspective," UFZ Discussion Papers 13/2012, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    5. Tilmann Rave & Ursula Triebswetter & Johann Wackerbauer, 2013. "Koordination von Innovations-, Energie- und Umweltpolitik," ifo Forschungsberichte, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 61, October.
    6. Paul Lehmann & Patrik Söderholm, 2018. "Can Technology-Specific Deployment Policies Be Cost-Effective? The Case of Renewable Energy Support Schemes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 475-505, October.
    7. Sijm, Jos & Lehmann, Paul & Chewpreecha, Unnada & Gawel, Erik & Mercure, Jean-Francois & Pollitt, Hector & Strunz, Sebastian, 2014. "EU climate and energy policy beyond 2020: Are additional targets and instruments for renewables economically reasonable?," UFZ Discussion Papers 3/2014, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    8. Lehmann, Paul, 2013. "Supplementing an emissions tax by a feed-in tariff for renewable electricity to address learning spillovers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 635-641.
    9. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    10. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    11. Lisa Biber-Freudenberger & Amit Kumar Basukala & Martin Bruckner & Jan Börner, 2018. "Sustainability Performance of National Bio-Economies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    12. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Introduction to the Political Economy of Environmental Regulations," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-12, Resources for the Future.
    13. Mattauch, Linus & Creutzig, Felix & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2015. "Avoiding carbon lock-in: Policy options for advancing structural change," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 49-63.
    14. Stavins, Robert N., 2019. "The Future of U.S. Carbon-Pricing Policy: Normative Assessment and Positive Prognosis," Working Paper Series rwp19-017, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    15. Dumas, Marion & Rising, James & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2016. "Political competition and renewable energy transitions over long time horizons: A dynamic approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 175-184.
    16. Kalkuhl, Matthias & Edenhofer, Ottmar & Lessmann, Kai, 2012. "Learning or lock-in: Optimal technology policies to support mitigation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23.
    17. Robert N. Stavins, 2020. "The Future of US Carbon-Pricing Policy," Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 8-64.
    18. del Río, Pablo, 2017. "Why does the combination of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme and a renewable energy target makes economic sense?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 824-834.
    19. Hoppmann, Joern & Peters, Michael & Schneider, Malte & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2013. "The two faces of market support—How deployment policies affect technological exploration and exploitation in the solar photovoltaic industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 989-1003.
    20. Andrew Cheon & Johannes Urpelainen, 2013. "How do Competing Interest Groups Influence Environmental Policy? The Case of Renewable Electricity in Industrialized Democracies, 1989–2007," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(4), pages 874-897, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:gjagec:270182. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iahubde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.