IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i5p1504-d145503.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the Transition to a Bio-Based Economy: Exploring Dynamics Linked to the Agricultural Sector in Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Therese Bennich

    (Department of Physical Geography, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Salim Belyazid

    (Department of Physical Geography, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Birgit Kopainsky

    (System Dynamics Group, Department of Geography, University of Bergen, Postboks 7802, 5020 Bergen, Norway)

  • Arnaud Diemer

    (Center for Studies and Research on Internal Development (CERDI), University of Clermont Auvergne, FR-320, 63009 Clermont-Ferrand, France)

Abstract

There is a growing interest in the bio-based economy, evident in the policy domain as well as in the academic literature. Its proponents consider it an opportunity to address multiple societal challenges, and the concept has broad reach across different sectors of society. However, a potential transition process is also linked to areas of risk and uncertainty, and the need for interdisciplinary research and for the identification of potential trade-offs and synergies between parallel visions of the bio-based economy have been emphasized. The aim of this paper is to contribute to addressing this gap by using an approach combining tools for systems analysis with expert interviews. Focusing specifically on dynamics in the agricultural sector in Sweden, an integrated understanding of the social and ecological processes contributing to or hindering a transition in this area is developed, high order leverage points are identified, and potential impacts of proposed interventions explored. The paper also considers cross-sectoral linkages between the forestry and agricultural sectors.

Suggested Citation

  • Therese Bennich & Salim Belyazid & Birgit Kopainsky & Arnaud Diemer, 2018. "Understanding the Transition to a Bio-Based Economy: Exploring Dynamics Linked to the Agricultural Sector in Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1504-:d:145503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1504/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1504/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    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. 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.
    3. Therese Bennich & Salim Belyazid & Birgit Kopainsky & Arnaud Diemer, 2018. "The Bio-Based Economy: Dynamics Governing Transition Pathways in the Swedish Forestry Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Kes McCormick & Niina Kautto, 2013. "The Bioeconomy in Europe: An Overview," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-20, June.
    5. Swinda F. Pfau & Janneke E. Hagens & Ben Dankbaar & Antoine J. M. Smits, 2014. "Visions of Sustainability in Bioeconomy Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-28, March.
    6. Krystyna Stave & Birgit Kopainsky, 2015. "A system dynamics approach for examining mechanisms and pathways of food supply vulnerability," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(3), pages 321-336, September.
    7. 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)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Franz Grossauer & Gernot Stoeglehner, 2023. "Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Spatial Aspects and a Call for a New Research Agenda," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, January.
    2. Aleksander Grzelak & Jakub Staniszewski & Michał Borychowski, 2020. "Income or Assets—What Determines the Approach to the Environment among Farmers in A Region in Poland?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Thomas Christensen & Calliope Panoutsou, 2022. "Advanced Biofuel Value Chains through System Dynamics Modelling and Competitive Priorities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-23, January.
    4. Ruth Oriama & Andreas Pyka, 2021. "Understanding the Transformation to a Knowledge-Based Health Bioeconomy: Exploring Dynamics Linked to Preventive Medicine in Kenya," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-24, November.
    5. Piergiuseppe Morone, 2018. "Sustainability Transition towards a Biobased Economy: Defining, Measuring and Assessing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-6, July.
    6. Inga C. Melchior & Jens Newig, 2021. "Governing Transitions towards Sustainable Agriculture—Taking Stock of an Emerging Field of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.

    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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Kean Birch, 2016. "Emergent Imaginaries and Fragmented Policy Frameworks in the Canadian Bio-Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    5. 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.
    6. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    7. Daniel Hausknost & Ernst Schriefl & Christian Lauk & Gerald Kalt, 2017. "A Transition to Which Bioeconomy? An Exploration of Diverging Techno-Political Choices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, April.
    8. 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).
    9. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    10. Stefania Bracco & Ozgul Calicioglu & Marta Gomez San Juan & Alessandro Flammini, 2018. "Assessing the Contribution of Bioeconomy to the Total Economy: A Review of National Frameworks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Rolf Meyer, 2017. "Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-32, June.
    12. Carmen Priefer & Rolf Meyer, 2019. "One Concept, Many Opinions: How Scientists in Germany Think About the Concept of Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Erik Gawel & Nadine Pannicke & Nina Hagemann, 2019. "A Path Transition Towards a Bioeconomy—The Crucial Role of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-23, May.
    14. Franz Grossauer & Gernot Stoeglehner, 2020. "Bioeconomy—Spatial Requirements for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-28, March.
    15. 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.
    16. Neagu Olimpia & Dumiter Florin & Braica Alexandra & Jimon Ștefania & David Gabriela, 2019. "The Correlation Between Human Capital and Gross Added Value in the Bioeconomy Sectors at the European Union (EU) Country Level," Studia Universitatis „Vasile Goldis” Arad – Economics Series, Sciendo, vol. 29(1), pages 1-20, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Dan Costin Nițescu & Valentin Murgu, 2020. "The Bioeconomy and Foreign Trade in Food Products—A Sustainable Partnership at the European Level?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-20, March.
    19. Sophie Urmetzer & Michael P. Schlaile & Kristina B. Bogner & Matthias Mueller & Andreas Pyka, 2018. "Exploring the Dedicated Knowledge Base of a Transformation towards a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-22, May.
    20. 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).

    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:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1504-:d:145503. 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.