IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v110y2020ics138993411830368x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of the policy mix in the transition toward a circular forest bioeconomy

Author

Listed:
  • Ladu, Luana
  • Imbert, Enrica
  • Quitzow, Rainer
  • Morone, Piergiuseppe

Abstract

Grand societal challenges call for a sustainability transition away from a fossil-based society toward a bioeconomy, in which energy and manufacturing production processes are based on sustainable biological resources. In this context, the forest bioeconomy can play a key role, as it links the entire forest value chain, from the management and use of natural resources to the delivery of products and services. The paper adds to the existing literature on policy mixes, seeking to identify effective policy mixes in support of the European circular forest bioeconomy. To this end, we employ a two-step methodology involving a fuzzy inference simulation, to assess the most suitable policy mixes to promote forest sector development. We considered different scenarios in order to identifying the most suitable policy mix. This analysis of alternatives revealed a number of interesting findings regarding the relative effectiveness of different policy mixes. Strengthening environmental policy resulted to be a precondition for an effective policy mix. According to stakeholder knowledge, the policy mix that performs best in pushing the bio-based forest to evolve in a circular and innovative trajectory, combines “climate mitigation policies” with “sustainable forest management policies,” “R&D policies” and “awareness raising policies.”

Suggested Citation

  • Ladu, Luana & Imbert, Enrica & Quitzow, Rainer & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "The role of the policy mix in the transition toward a circular forest bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:110:y:2020:i:c:s138993411830368x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.05.023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993411830368X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.05.023?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    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. Lillian Hansen & Hilde Bjørkhaug, 2017. "Visions and Expectations for the Norwegian Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Pätäri, Satu & Tuppura, Anni & Toppinen, Anne & Korhonen, Jaana, 2016. "Global sustainability megaforces in shaping the future of the European pulp and paper industry towards a bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 38-46.
    4. Kemp, René & Pontoglio, Serena, 2011. "The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments — A typical case of the blind men and the elephant?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 28-36.
    5. Rogge, Karoline S. & Schleich, Joachim, 2018. "Do policy mix characteristics matter for low-carbon innovation? A survey-based exploration of renewable power generation technologies in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1639-1654.
    6. Quitzow, Rainer, 2015. "Assessing policy strategies for the promotion of environmental technologies: A review of India's National Solar Mission," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 233-243.
    7. Imbert, Enrica & Ladu, Luana & Morone, Piergiuseppe & Quitzow, Rainer, 2017. "Policy strategies for a transition to a bioeconomy in Europe: the case of Italy and Germany," MPRA Paper 78143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Nicholas A. Ashford & Ralph P. Hall, 2011. "The Importance of Regulation-Induced Innovation for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-23, January.
    9. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    10. Florian Kern & Michael Howlett, 2009. "Implementing transition management as policy reforms: a case study of the Dutch energy sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 391-408, November.
    11. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    12. Hurmekoski, Elias & Hetemäki, Lauri, 2013. "Studying the future of the forest sector: Review and implications for long-term outlook studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 17-29.
    13. Flanagan, Kieron & Uyarra, Elvira & Laranja, Manuel, 2011. "Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 702-713, June.
    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. Yasmin Imparato Maximo & Mariana Hassegawa & Pieter Johannes Verkerk & André Luiz Missio, 2022. "Forest Bioeconomy in Brazil: Potential Innovative Products from the Forest Sector," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Daniel Holzer & Claudia Mair-Bauernfeind & Michael Kriechbaum & Romana Rauter & Tobias Stern, 2023. "Different but the Same? Comparing Drivers and Barriers for Circular Economy Innovation Systems in Wood- and Plastic-Based Industries," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    3. Weiss, Gerhard & Hansen, Eric & Ludvig, Alice & Nybakk, Erlend & Toppinen, Anne, 2021. "Innovation governance in the forest sector: Reviewing concepts, trends and gaps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    4. Idiano D’Adamo & Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Enrica Imbert & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2022. "Exploring regional transitions to the bioeconomy using a socio-economic indicator: the case of Italy," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 989-1021, October.
    5. Banos, Vincent & Deuffic, Philippe & Brahic, Elodie, 2022. "Engaging or resisting? How forest–based industry and private forest owners respond to bioenergy policies in Aquitaine (Southwestern France)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    6. Monika Stelmaszczyk & Agata Pierscieniak & Denisa Abrudan, 2023. "Managerial decisions and new product development in the circular economy model enterprise: absorptive capacity and a mediating role of strategic orientation," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 50(1), pages 35-49, March.
    7. Vito Imbrenda & Rosa Coluzzi & Francesca Mariani & Bogdana Nosova & Eva Cudlinova & Rosanna Salvia & Giovanni Quaranta & Luca Salvati & Maria Lanfredi, 2023. "Working in (Slow) Progress: Socio-Environmental and Economic Dynamics in the Forestry Sector and the Contribution to Sustainable Development in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-21, June.
    8. Purkus, Alexandra & Lüdtke, Jan, 2020. "A systemic evaluation framework for a multi-actor, forest-based bioeconomy governance process: The German Charter for Wood 2.0 as a case study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    9. Arnould, Maxence & Morel, Laure & Fournier, Meriem, 2022. "Embedding non-industrial private forest owners in forest policy and bioeconomy issues using a Living Lab concept," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    10. Koppiahraj Karuppiah & Bathrinath Sankaranarayanan & Syed Mithun Ali & Ernesto D. R. Santibanez Gonzalez, 2023. "Impact of Circular Bioeconomy on Industry’s Sustainable Performance: A Critical Literature Review and Future Research Directions Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-17, July.
    11. Maria Lanfredi & Rosa Coluzzi & Vito Imbrenda & Bogdana Nosova & Massimiliano Giacalone & Rosario Turco & Marcela Prokopovà & Luca Salvati, 2023. "In-between Environmental Sustainability and Economic Viability: An Analysis of the State, Regulations, and Future of Italian Forestry Sector," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, May.
    12. 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.
    13. Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Fischer, Richard & Tamayo, Fabian & Navarrete, Bolier Torres & Günter, Sven, 2022. "Analyzing forest policy mixes based on the coherence of policies and the consistency of legislative policy instruments: A case study from Ecuador," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.

    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. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    2. Karoline S. Rogge & Elisabeth Dütschke, 2017. "Exploring Perceptions of the Credibility of Policy Mixes: The Case of German Manufacturers of Renewable Power Generation Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-23, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    3. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    4. Trotter, Philipp A. & Brophy, Aoife, 2022. "Policy mixes for business model innovation: The case of off-grid energy for sustainable development in sub-Saharan Africa," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    5. Ossenbrink, Jan & Finnsson, Sveinbjoern & Bening, Catharina R. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2019. "Delineating policy mixes: Contrasting top-down and bottom-up approaches to the case of energy-storage policy in California," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    6. Schmidt, Tobias S. & Sewerin, Sebastian, 2019. "Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – An empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    7. Rogge, Karoline S. & Schleich, Joachim, 2018. "Do policy mix characteristics matter for low-carbon innovation? A survey-based exploration of renewable power generation technologies in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1639-1654.
    8. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Knoeri, Christof & Hoppmann, Joern & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "Beyond innovation and deployment: Modeling the impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies in Germany's solar policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    9. Imbert, Enrica & Ladu, Luana & Morone, Piergiuseppe & Quitzow, Rainer, 2017. "Policy strategies for a transition to a bioeconomy in Europe: the case of Italy and Germany," MPRA Paper 78143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    11. Diercks, Gijs, 2019. "Lost in translation: How legacy limits the OECD in promoting new policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    12. Quitzow, Rainer, 2015. "Assessing policy strategies for the promotion of environmental technologies: A review of India's National Solar Mission," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 233-243.
    13. Xieao Chen & Ping Huang & Zhenhong Xiao, 2022. "Uncovering the verticality and temporality of environmental policy mixes: The case of agricultural residue recycling in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(5), pages 632-653, September.
    14. Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Lopolito, Antonio & Sica, Edgardo, 2019. "Instrument mix for energy transition: A method for policy formulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    15. Wilts, Henning & O'Brien, Meghan, 2019. "A Policy Mix for Resource Efficiency in the EU: Key Instruments, Challenges and Research Needs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 59-69.
    16. Mavrot, Céline & Hadorn, Susanne & Sager, Fritz, 2019. "Mapping the mix: Linking instruments, settings and target groups in the study of policy mixes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    17. Kanger, Laur & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Noorkõiv, Martin, 2020. "Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    18. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    19. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    20. Malhotra, Abhishek, 2022. "Trade-offs and synergies in power sector policy mixes: The case of Uttar Pradesh, India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).

    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:eee:forpol:v:110:y:2020:i:c:s138993411830368x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.