IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gjagec/270184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Public Debate on Biofuels in Germany: Who Drives the Discourse?

Author

Listed:
  • Puttkammer, Judith
  • Grethe, Harald

Abstract

Following the European Commission’s concept of a “Knowledge-based Bioeconomy” (KBBE), great significance in the process of political decision-making shall be attached to scientific expertise. In contrast, the conducted print media analysis on the German biofuel discourse for the period from 1995 to 2012 only found a marginal role of scientific actors in the debate. Even though support for biofuels has been largely rejected as inefficient by several scientific brain trusts for many years, the German government, as well as the EU adhere to this policy. This raises the question of the underlying interests that drive the persistent support for biofuels. In this context, the paper investigates the standing and positioning of different actors in the public media and thereby it contributes to a better understanding of why the political support for biofuels is continued, despite the doubts of scientists. One of the core findings of the study states, that one reason for this political support can be seen in the dominance of a coalition of biofuel advocates, mainly formed by political and economic actors, in the public discourse. Laut dem Konzept der Europäischen Kommission einer wissensbasierten Bioökonomie soll dem wissenschaftlichen Expertenwissen eine bedeutende Rolle im politischen Entscheidungsprozess zukommen. Hingegen stellt die durchgeführte Printmedienanalyse des deutschen Biokraftstoffdiskurses von 1995 bis 2012 nur eine untergeordnete Rolle wissenschaftlicher Akteure in der Debatte fest. Obwohl weite Teile der Biokraftstoffförderung seit Jahren von wissenschaftlichen Expertengremien als ineffizient abgelehnt werden, halten die Bundesregierung und die EU an dieser Politik fest. Dies wirft die Frage auf, welche Interessen die anhaltende Förderung von Biokraftstoffen tatsächlich vorantreiben. In diesem Zusammenhang untersucht der Artikel das Standing und die Positionierung verschiedener Akteure in den öffentlichen Medien und trägt damit zu einem besseren Verständnis bei, warum die Biokraftstoffpolitik trotz der starken Kritik von Wissenschaftlern gefördert wird. Ein zentrales Ergebnis der Studie besagt, dass die Dominanz einer Koalition aus Biokraftstoffbefürwortern im öffentlichen Diskurs, welche sich vor allem aus politischen und ökonomischen Akteuren zusammensetzt, als ein Grund für die politische Förderung von Biokraftstoffen anzusehen ist.

Suggested Citation

  • Puttkammer, Judith & Grethe, Harald, 2015. "The Public Debate on Biofuels in Germany: Who Drives the Discourse?," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 64(04), December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gjagec:270184
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.270184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270184/files/4_Puttkammer.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270184/files/4_Puttkammer.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.270184?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. Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2010. "The Political Economy of Agricultural and Food Policies: Recent Contributions, New Insights, and Areas for Further Research," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(1), pages 33-58.
    2. 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.
    3. Volker Schneider & Jana Ollmann, 2013. "Punctuations and Displacements in Policy Discourse: The Climate Change Issue in Germany 2007-2010," Chapters, in: Steven Silvern & Stephen Young (ed.), Environmental Change and Sustainability, IntechOpen.
    4. Maurice Doyon, 2015. "Can Agricultural Economists Improve Their Policy Relevance?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(1), pages 1-5, March.
    5. Lars Brink, 2013. "Making Agricultural Economics Research Relevant for Policy Advice," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 61(1), pages 15-36, March.
    6. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Deppermann, Andre & Offermann, Frank & Puttkammer, Judith & Grethe, Harald, 2016. "EU biofuel policies: Income effects and lobbying decisions in the German agricultural sector," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(P1), pages 259-265.
    8. Sebastian Hess & Stephan von Cramon-Taubadel & Ulrike Zschache & Ludwig Theuvsen & Daniela Kleinschmit, 2012. "Explaining the puzzling persistence of restrictions on seasonal farm labour in Germany," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 39(4), pages 707-728, September.
    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. 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.
    3. Jürges, Nataly, 2016. "Wahrnehmungen und Funktionen in der Transformation zur Bioökonomie: Eine Akteursanalyse im Politikfeld "Boden"," UFZ Discussion Papers 6/2016, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    4. Drittler, Lara & Rübcke von Veltheim, Friedrich & Schaper, Christian & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2018. "Der Markt für Bioenergie," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 67(Supplemen), April.
    5. Mijailoff, Julián Daniel & Burns, Sarah Lilian, 2023. "Fixing the meaning of floating signifier: Discourses and network analysis in the bioeconomy policy processes in Argentina and Uruguay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Sophia Dieken & Sandra Venghaus, 2020. "Potential Pathways to the German Bioeconomy: A Media Discourse Analysis of Public Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-24, September.

    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. Ji, Xi & Long, Xianling, 2016. "A review of the ecological and socioeconomic effects of biofuel and energy policy recommendations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 41-52.
    2. Brinkman, Marnix L.J. & Wicke, Birka & Faaij, André P.C. & van der Hilst, Floor, 2019. "Projecting socio-economic impacts of bioenergy: Current status and limitations of ex-ante quantification methods," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Umeki, Kentaro & Mousa, Elsayed & Hedayati, Ali & Romar, Henrik & Kemppainen, Antti & Wang, Chuan & Phounglamcheik, Aekjuthon & Tuomikoski, Sari & Norberg, Nicklas & Andefors, Alf , 2018. "Use of biomass in integrated steelmaking – Status quo, future needs and comparison to other low-CO2 steel production technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 384-407.
    4. Tonini, Davide & Vadenbo, Carl & Astrup, Thomas Fruergaard, 2017. "Priority of domestic biomass resources for energy: Importance of national environmental targets in a climate perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 295-309.
    5. Lotze-Campen, Hermann & von Witzke, Harald & Noleppa, Steffen & Schwarz, Gerald, 2015. "Science for food, climate protection and welfare: An economic analysis of plant breeding research in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 79-84.
    6. Iriarte, Alfredo & Rieradevall, Joan & Gabarrell, Xavier, 2012. "Transition towards a more environmentally sustainable biodiesel in South America: The case of Chile," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 263-273.
    7. Kriegler, Elmar, 2011. "Comment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 594-596, July.
    8. Marc-Olivier Bessette & Mariame Dioubate & Myriane Hébert & Miriam Elsie Kuimi Tchana & Laura Morissette & Jean-Charles Toupin & Raoul Yaro & Maurice Doyon, 2020. "La présence de biais cognitifs en analyse économique : une étude de cas," CIRANO Working Papers 2020s-12, CIRANO.
    9. Proost, Stef & Van Dender, Kurt, 2012. "Energy and environment challenges in the transport sector," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 77-87.
    10. repec:fpr:ifprib:2012ghienglish is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Canabarro, N.I. & Silva-Ortiz, P. & Nogueira, L.A.H. & Cantarella, H. & Maciel-Filho, R. & Souza, G.M., 2023. "Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    12. Baral, Nabin & Rabotyagov, Sergey, 2017. "How much are wood-based cellulosic biofuels worth in the Pacific Northwest? Ex-ante and ex-post analysis of local people's willingness to pay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 99-106.
    13. John Davis, 2018. "Communicating Economic Concepts and Research in a Challenging Environment," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(3), pages 591-605, September.
    14. Delpeuch, Claire & Leblois, Antoine, 2014. "The Elusive Quest for Supply Response to Cash-Crop Market Reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Case of Cotton," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 521-537.
    15. Baka, Jennifer & Roland-Holst, David, 2009. "Food or fuel? What European farmers can contribute to Europe's transport energy requirements and the Doha Round," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2505-2513, July.
    16. Maurice Doyon & Stéphane Bergeron & Lota Tamini, 2017. "Policy relevance of applied economist: Examining sensitivity and inferences," CIRANO Working Papers 2017s-12, CIRANO.
    17. Chiaramonti, David & Goumas, Theodor, 2019. "Impacts on industrial-scale market deployment of advanced biofuels and recycled carbon fuels from the EU Renewable Energy Directive II," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Nguyen, Thu Lan T. & Hermansen, John E. & Mogensen, Lisbeth, 2010. "Fossil energy and GHG saving potentials of pig farming in the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2561-2571, May.
    19. Sarah Jansen & William Foster & Gustavo Anríquez & Jorge Ortega, 2021. "Understanding Farm-Level Incentives within the Bioeconomy Framework: Prices, Product Quality, Losses, and Bio-Based Alternatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, January.
    20. Shortall, O.K., 2013. "“Marginal land” for energy crops: Exploring definitions and embedded assumptions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 19-27.
    21. Argueyrolles, Robin & Delzeit, Ruth, 2022. "The interconnections between Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reforms and biofuels," Conference papers 333492, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    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:270184. 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.