IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v151y2021ics1364032121008054.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biorefinery: A comprehensive concept for the sociotechnical transition toward bioeconomy

Author

Listed:
  • Conteratto, Caroline
  • Artuzo, Felipe Dalzotto
  • Benedetti Santos, Omar Inácio
  • Talamini, Edson

Abstract

Bioeconomy has been presented as an alternative for sustainable development. Public policies and national bioeconomy programs have reserved an essential role for biorefineries. However, the misinterpretation of what a biorefinery might be can lead to the adoption of biased public policies, restricting its potential. Therefore, the concept of biorefinery requires a conceptual definition appropriate for the context of bioeconomy. This article aims to propose a contemporary concept for biorefinery, adjusted to the bioeconomy perspective. An epistemological review of the prefix “bio” and the base “refine” was carried out. The biorefinery concepts established in the literature were revisited and grouped by their focus on inputs, processes, or bioproducts. The required concept of biorefinery in the bioeconomy context is discussed. Our updated concept defines biorefinery as “a physical, chemical, or biological process which purifies, separates, refines, or transforms elements constituting biological assets from the kingdoms Monera, Protista, Plantae, Animalia, or Fungi, originating from the terrestrial or oceanic environment, in bioproducts for final use or that serve as raw material for other bioproducts.” Adopting this concept can promote appropriate public policies for a broader set of biorefineries and pave the way for the sociotechnical transition toward bioeconomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Conteratto, Caroline & Artuzo, Felipe Dalzotto & Benedetti Santos, Omar Inácio & Talamini, Edson, 2021. "Biorefinery: A comprehensive concept for the sociotechnical transition toward bioeconomy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:151:y:2021:i:c:s1364032121008054
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.111527
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032121008054
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111527?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. Matteo De Besi & Kes McCormick, 2015. "Towards a Bioeconomy in Europe: National, Regional and Industrial Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Lan, Kai & Ou, Longwen & Park, Sunkyu & Kelley, Stephen S. & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Larson, James & Yao, Yuan, 2021. "Techno-Economic Analysis of decentralized preprocessing systems for fast pyrolysis biorefineries with blended feedstocks in the southeastern United States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Thomas Covert & Michael Greenstone & Christopher R. Knittel, 2016. "Will We Ever Stop Using Fossil Fuels?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(1), pages 117-138, Winter.
    5. Hossain, Tasmin & Jones, Daniela & Hartley, Damon & Griffel, L. Michael & Lin, Yingqian & Burli, Pralhad & Thompson, David N. & Langholtz, Matthew & Davis, Maggie & Brandt, Craig, 2021. "The nth-plant scenario for blended feedstock conversion and preprocessing nationwide: Biorefineries and depots," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 294(C).
    6. Farrokhi, Farid, 2020. "Global sourcing in oil markets," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    7. Sadvakasova, Asemgul K. & Kossalbayev, Bekzhan D. & Zayadan, Bolatkhan K. & Bolatkhan, Kenzhegul & Alwasel, Saleh & Najafpour, Mohammad Mahdi & Tomo, Tatsuya & Allakhverdiev, Suleyman I., 2020. "Bioprocesses of hydrogen production by cyanobacteria cells and possible ways to increase their productivity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    8. Bildirici, Melike E. & Bakirtas, Tahsin, 2014. "The relationship among oil, natural gas and coal consumption and economic growth in BRICTS (Brazil, Russian, India, China, Turkey and South Africa) countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 134-144.
    9. Souza, Simone P. & Gopal, Anand R. & Seabra, Joaquim E.A., 2015. "Life cycle assessment of biofuels from an integrated Brazilian algae-sugarcane biorefinery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 373-381.
    10. Zhang, Zibin & Lohr, Luanne & Escalante, Cesar & Wetzstein, Michael, 2010. "Food versus fuel: What do prices tell us?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 445-451, January.
    11. Bentley, R. W., 2002. "Global oil & gas depletion: an overview," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 189-205, February.
    12. Vildåsen, Sigurd Sagen & Keitsch, Martina & Fet, Annik Magerholm, 2017. "Clarifying the Epistemology of Corporate Sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 40-46.
    13. 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).
    14. Filip, Ondrej & Janda, Karel & Kristoufek, Ladislav & Zilberman, David, 2019. "Food versus fuel: An updated and expanded evidence," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 152-166.
    15. Anders Bjørn & Katherine Richardson & Michael Zwicky Hauschild, 2019. "A Framework for Development and Communication of Absolute Environmental Sustainability Assessment Methods," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(4), pages 838-854, August.
    16. Stefan Pauliuk & Anders Arvesen & Konstantin Stadler & Edgar G. Hertwich, 2017. "Industrial ecology in integrated assessment models," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 13-20, January.
    17. Moretti, Christian & Moro, Alberto & Edwards, Robert & Rocco, Matteo Vincenzo & Colombo, Emanuela, 2017. "Analysis of standard and innovative methods for allocating upstream and refinery GHG emissions to oil products," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 372-381.
    18. 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.
    19. Sadhukhan, Jhuma & Martinez-Hernandez, Elias & Murphy, Richard J. & Ng, Denny K.S. & Hassim, Mimi H. & Siew Ng, Kok & Yoke Kin, Wan & Jaye, Ida Fahani Md & Leung Pah Hang, Melissa Y. & Andiappan, Vikn, 2018. "Role of bioenergy, biorefinery and bioeconomy in sustainable development: Strategic pathways for Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 1966-1987.
    20. Giampietro, Mario, 2019. "On the Circular Bioeconomy and Decoupling: Implications for Sustainable Growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 143-156.
    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. Rodrigo Luiz Morais-da-Silva & Eduardo Guedes Villar & Germano Glufke Reis & Hermes Sanctorum & Carla Forte Maiolino Molento, 2022. "The expected impact of cultivated and plant-based meats on jobs: the views of experts from Brazil, the United States and Europe," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, December.

    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. 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).
    2. 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.
    3. Wolfgang Onyeali & Michael P. Schlaile & Bastian Winkler, 2023. "Navigating the Biocosmos: Cornerstones of a Bioeconomic Utopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-32, June.
    4. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen-Kurki, K. & Lyytikainen, V. & Matthies, B.D. & Horcea-Milcu, A-I., 2022. "Circular bioeconomy: Actors and dynamics of knowledge co-production in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    5. Maria Sylvia Macchione Saes & Beatriz Macchione Saes & Elis Regina Monte Feitosa & Peter Poschen & Adalberto Luis Val & Jacques Marcovitch, 2023. "When Do Supply Chains Strengthen Biological and Cultural Diversity? Methods and Indicators for the Socio-Biodiversity Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Halonen, Maija & Näyhä, Annukka & Kuhmonen, Irene, 2022. "Regional sustainability transition through forest-based bioeconomy? Development actors' perspectives on related policies, power, and justice," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    7. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen, J. & Toppinen, A., 2019. "Circular, Green, and Bio Economy: How Do Companies in Land-Use Intensive Sectors Align with Sustainability Concepts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 116-133.
    8. Giurca, Alexandru & Befort, Nicolas, 2023. "Deconstructing substitution narratives: The case of bioeconomy innovations from the forest-based sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    9. D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "A New Socio-economic Indicator to Measure the Performance of Bioeconomy Sectors in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    10. D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Imbert, Enrica & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "A Socio-economic Indicator for EoL Strategies for Bio-based Products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    11. Ondřej Filip & Karel Janda & Ladislav Krištoufek, 2018. "Ceny biopaliv a souvisejících komodit: analýza s použitím metod minimální kostry grafu a hierarchických stromů [Prices of Biofuels and Related Commodities: an Analysis Using Methods of Minimum Span," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2018(2), pages 218-239.
    12. Ayrapetyan, David & Hermans, Frans, 2020. "Introducing a multiscalar framework for biocluster research: A meta-analysis," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(9).
    13. 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).
    14. Lühmann, Malte & Vogelpohl, Thomas, 2023. "The bioeconomy in Germany: A failing political project?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    15. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    16. Jim Philp, 2021. "Biotechnologies to Bridge the Schism in the Bioeconomy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    17. 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.
    18. Befort, N., 2021. "The promises of drop-in vs. functional innovations: The case of bioplastics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    19. Hossain, Tasmin & Jones, Daniela S. & Hartley, Damon S. & Thompson, David N. & Langholtz, Matthew & Davis, Maggie, 2022. "Nth-plant scenario for forest resources and short rotation woody crops: Biorefineries and depots in the contiguous US," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 325(C).
    20. 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).

    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:rensus:v:151:y:2021:i:c:s1364032121008054. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.