IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i2p1634-d1035645.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Bioeconomy Development Opportunities in the Latvian Policy Planning Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Krista Laktuka

    (Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Faculty of Electrical and Environmental Engineering, Riga Technical University, LV-1048 Riga, Latvia)

  • Dagnija Blumberga

    (Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Faculty of Electrical and Environmental Engineering, Riga Technical University, LV-1048 Riga, Latvia)

  • Stelios Rozakis

    (Bioeconomy and Biosystems Economics Laboratory, School of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Crete, 73100 Chania, Greece)

Abstract

The broad spectrum of bioresource use makes it challenging to interconnect strategic objectives and policy planning documents without compromising a coherent development vision. Bioeconomy development directions have been defined at the EU and Latvian levels. Nevertheless, to facilitate their implementation, the goals must be consistent with those specified in relevant national policy planning documents and vice versa. To determine whether internationally defined bioeconomy objectives are implemented in Latvian policy planning documents and what priority is given to them, a mixed methods approach was used—a systematic literature review combined with a keyphrase assignment approach. The results are summarized in an illustrative screening matrix and aggregated using the TOPSIS method to identify in which policy planning documents bioeconomy objectives are prioritized and to what extent. The results have shown a high prioritization of bioeconomy objectives in Latvian policy planning documents, especially in hierarchically higher documents.

Suggested Citation

  • Krista Laktuka & Dagnija Blumberga & Stelios Rozakis, 2023. "Assessing Bioeconomy Development Opportunities in the Latvian Policy Planning Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1634-:d:1035645
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1634/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1634/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Snyder, Hannah, 2019. "Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 333-339.
    2. Sorrell, Steve, 2007. "Improving the evidence base for energy policy: The role of systematic reviews," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1858-1871, March.
    3. Gisle Solbu, 2021. "Frictions in the bioeconomy? A case study of policy translations and innovation practices [‘Don’t Make Nanotechnology Sexy, Ensure Its Benefits, and Be Neutral’: Studying the Logics of New Intermed," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(6), pages 911-920.
    4. Luke Kelleher & Maeve Henchion & Eoin O’Neill, 2019. "Policy Coherence and the Transition to a Bioeconomy: The Case of Ireland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-25, December.
    5. Hasan Ture & Seyyide Dogan & Deniz Kocak, 2019. "Assessing Euro 2020 Strategy Using Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods: VIKOR and TOPSIS," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(2), pages 645-665, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ali Zackery & Joseph Amankwah-Amoah & Zahra Heidari Darani & Shiva Ghasemi, 2022. "COVID-19 Research in Business and Management: A Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-32, August.
    2. Eusebius Pantja Pramudya & Lukas Rumboko Wibowo & Fitri Nurfatriani & Iman Kasiman Nawireja & Dewi Ratna Kurniasari & Sakti Hutabarat & Yohanes Berenika Kadarusman & Ananda Oemi Iswardhani & Rukaiyah , 2022. "Incentives for Palm Oil Smallholders in Mandatory Certification in Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-28, April.
    3. Peter Schnell & Phillip Haag & Hans Christian Jünger, 2022. "Implementation of Digital Technologies in Construction Companies: Establishing a Holistic Process which Addresses Current Barriers," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Chen, Yanyan & Mandler, Timo & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2021. "Three decades of research on loyalty programs: A literature review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 179-197.
    5. 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.
    6. Nathanael Ojong, 2022. "Fostering Human Wellbeing in Africa through Solar Home Systems: A Systematic and a Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-15, July.
    7. Hongxia Jin & Lu Lu & Haojun Fan, 2022. "Global Trends and Research Hotspots in Long COVID: A Bibliometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-14, March.
    8. Prince Donkor Ameyaw & Walter Timo de Vries, 2020. "Transparency of Land Administration and the Role of Blockchain Technology, a Four-Dimensional Framework Analysis from the Ghanaian Land Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    9. Amal Almansour & Reem Alotaibi & Hajar Alharbi, 2022. "Text-rating review discrepancy (TRRD): an integrative review and implications for research," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    10. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Bazilian, Morgan & Griffiths, Steve & Kim, Jinsoo & Foley, Aoife & Rooney, David, 2021. "Decarbonizing the food and beverages industry: A critical and systematic review of developments, sociotechnical systems and policy options," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    11. Švarc, Jadranka & Dabić, Marina, 2021. "Transformative innovation policy or how to escape peripheral policy paradox in European research peripheral countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    12. So, Hau Wing & Lafortezza, Raffaele, 2022. "Reviewing the impacts of eco-labelling of forest products on different dimensions of sustainability in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    13. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Pascual Fernández Martínez & Amelia Pérez Zabaleta & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "Dealing with Water Conflicts: A Comprehensive Review of MCDM Approaches to Manage Freshwater Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-32, April.
    14. Mackey, Jeremy D., 2022. "The effect of cultural values on the strength of the relationship between interpersonal and organizational workplace deviance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 760-771.
    15. Alexander Salmen, 2021. "New Product Launch Success: A Literature Review," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 69(1), pages 151-176.
    16. Gorbach, O.G. & Kost, C. & Pickett, C., 2022. "Review of internal carbon pricing and the development of a decision process for the identification of promising Internal Pricing Methods for an Organisation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    17. Halim Lee & Jaewon Son & Dayoon Joo & Jinhyeok Ha & Seongreal Yun & Chul-Hee Lim & Woo-Kyun Lee, 2020. "Sustainable Water Security Based on the SDG Framework: A Case Study of the 2019 Metro Manila Water Crisis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Rachel Greer & Timo Wirth & Derk Loorbach, 2023. "The Circular Decision-Making Tree: an Operational Framework," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    19. Del Vecchio, Pasquale & Secundo, Giustina & Garzoni, Antonello, 2023. "Phygital technologies and environments for breakthrough innovation in customers' and citizens' journey. A critical literature review and future agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    20. Pina Puntillo & Carmela Gulluscio & Donald Huisingh & Stefania Veltri, 2021. "Reevaluating waste as a resource under a circular economy approach from a system perspective: Findings from a case study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 968-984, February.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1634-:d:1035645. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.