IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlage/v67y2021i7id21-2021-agricecon.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Case studies research in the bioeconomy: A systematic literature review

Author

Listed:
  • Gianmaria Tassinari

    (Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands
    Dipartimento di Economia Agro-Alimentare, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Piacenza, Italy)

  • Dušan Drabik

    (Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands)

  • Stefano Boccaletti

    (Dipartimento di Economia Agro-Alimentare, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Piacenza, Italy)

  • Claudio Soregaroli

    (Dipartimento di Economia Agro-Alimentare, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Piacenza, Italy)

Abstract

Case study research plays a crucial role in studying the development of the bioeconomy. The versatility of the empirical method coupled with the uncertainty surrounding the bioeconomy concept requires a consistent and comparable application of the method to obtain valid and generalizable results. To stimulate such systematization, we first need to know the state of case studies in bioeconomy research. This article reviews the recent literature with a qualitative content analysis facilitated by systematic text coding. Our results provide an overview of how the narratives of the concept of bioeconomy affect the versatility of the case study research. Based on the low density of the illustrated semantic networks, we conclude that future empirical research on bio-based phenomena should be more transdisciplinary and rely more on cross-sectoral approaches. Further work is also required in developing common research protocols that support transparency and replicability of case studies in the bioeconomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Gianmaria Tassinari & Dušan Drabik & Stefano Boccaletti & Claudio Soregaroli, 2021. "Case studies research in the bioeconomy: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(7), pages 286-303.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlage:v:67:y:2021:i:7:id:21-2021-agricecon
    DOI: 10.17221/21/2021-AGRICECON
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/21/2021-AGRICECON.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/21/2021-AGRICECON.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/21/2021-AGRICECON?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. T.A. Skvortsova & I.P. Denisova & N.G. Romanenko & A.V. Sukhovenko, 2018. "Innovations and Support for Quality in Agriculture: A Case Study," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special1), pages 423-431.
    2. Vivien, F.-D. & Nieddu, M. & Befort, N. & Debref, R. & Giampietro, M., 2019. "The Hijacking of the Bioeconomy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 189-197.
    3. 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.
    4. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2016. "Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 787-804, February.
    5. Dautzenberg, Kirsti & Hanf, Jon, 2008. "Biofuel chain development in Germany: Organisation, opportunities, and challenges," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 485-489, January.
    6. Toledo, David & Briceño, Tania & Ospina, German, 2018. "Ecosystem service valuation framework applied to a legal case in the Anchicaya region of Colombia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 352-359.
    7. Tobias Stern & Ursula Ploll & Raphael Spies & Peter Schwarzbauer & Franziska Hesser & Lea Ranacher, 2018. "Understanding Perceptions of the Bioeconomy in Austria—An Explorative Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    8. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard & Coenen, Lars, 2014. "Why space matters in technological innovation systems—Mapping global knowledge dynamics of membrane bioreactor technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 138-155.
    9. Kabyanga, Moris & Balana, Bedru B. & Mugisha, Johnny & Walekhwa, Peter N. & Smith, Jo & Glenk, Klaus, 2018. "Economic potential of flexible balloon biogas digester among smallholder farmers: A case study from Uganda," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 392-400.
    10. Justus Wesseler & Joachim von Braun, 2017. "Measuring the Bioeconomy: Economics and Policies," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 275-298, October.
    11. Justus Wesseler & Joachim von Braun, 2017. "Measuring the Bioeconomy: Economics and Policies," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 275-298, October.
    12. Tilahun Woldie Mengistu & Saurabh Gupta & Regina Birner, 2018. "Analysis of maize biomass use in Ethiopia and its implications for food security and the bioeconomy," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(6), pages 1631-1648, December.
    13. repec:ers:journl:v:special_issue:y:2018:i:1:p:423-431 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    15. Boons, Frank & Wagner, Marcus, 2009. "Assessing the relationship between economic and ecological performance: Distinguishing system levels and the role of innovation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1908-1914, May.
    16. Markus M. Bugge & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2016. "What Is the Bioeconomy? A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    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. Mauricio Alviar & Andrés García-Suaza & Laura Ramírez-Gómez & Simón Villegas-Velásquez, 2021. "Measuring the Contribution of the Bioeconomy: The Case of Colombia and Antioquia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    2. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    3. George B. Frisvold & Steven M. Moss & Andrea Hodgson & Mary E. Maxon, 2021. "Understanding the U.S. Bioeconomy: A New Definition and Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    4. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Zeug, Walther & Bezama, Alberto & Thrän, Daniela, 2020. "Towards a holistic and integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of the bioeconomy: Background on concepts, visions and measurements," UFZ Discussion Papers 7/2020, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    6. Leonard Prochaska & Daniel Schiller, 2021. "An evolutionary perspective on the emergence and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policy: the example of the change of the leitmotif from biotechnology to bioeconomy," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 141-249, April.
    7. Durwin H.J. Lynch & Pim Klaassen & Lan van Wassenaer & Jacqueline E.W. Broerse, 2020. "Constructing the Public in Roadmapping the Transition to a Bioeconomy: A Case Study from the Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    8. 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.
    9. P. J. Stephenson & Anca Damerell, 2022. "Bioeconomy and Circular Economy Approaches Need to Enhance the Focus on Biodiversity to Achieve Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, August.
    10. Franz Grossauer & Gernot Stoeglehner, 2020. "Bioeconomy—Spatial Requirements for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-28, March.
    11. Daniela Pasnicu & Mihaela Ghenta & Aniela Matei, 2019. "Transition to Bioeconomy: Perceptions and Behaviors in Central and Eastern Europe," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 21(50), pages 1-9, February.
    12. Wiebke Jander & Sven Wydra & Johann Wackerbauer & Philipp Grundmann & Stephan Piotrowski, 2020. "Monitoring Bioeconomy Transitions with Economic–Environmental and Innovation Indicators: Addressing Data Gaps in the Short Term," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-18, June.
    13. Maximilian Kardung & Kutay Cingiz & Ortwin Costenoble & Roel Delahaye & Wim Heijman & Marko Lovrić & Myrna van Leeuwen & Robert M’Barek & Hans van Meijl & Stephan Piotrowski & Tévécia Ronzon & Johanne, 2021. "Development of the Circular Bioeconomy: Drivers and Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, January.
    14. Benoit Mougenot & Jean-Pierre Doussoulin, 2022. "Conceptual evolution of the bioeconomy: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1031-1047, January.
    15. Giampietro, Mario, 2019. "On the Circular Bioeconomy and Decoupling: Implications for Sustainable Growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 143-156.
    16. Andrew M. Neill & Cathal O’Donoghue & Jane C. Stout, 2020. "A Natural Capital Lens for a Sustainable Bioeconomy: Determining the Unrealised and Unrecognised Services from Nature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-24, September.
    17. Lovrić, Nataša & Lovrić, Marko & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Factors behind development of innovations in European forest-based bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Tévécia Ronzon & Susanne Iost & George Philippidis, 2022. "Has the European Union entered a bioeconomy transition? Combining an output-based approach with a shift-share analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 8195-8217, June.
    20. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen, J., 2021. "Integrating the green economy, circular economy and bioeconomy in a strategic sustainability framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(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:caa:jnlage:v:67:y:2021:i:7:id:21-2021-agricecon. 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: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    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.