IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p7628-d590580.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Acceptance of Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Swedish Consumers’ Perspectives on a Low Carbon Transition

Author

Listed:
  • Emil Nagy

    (Department of Forest Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Carolina Berg Rustas

    (Department of Forest Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Cecilia Mark-Herbert

    (Department of Forest Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

Abstract

The concept of the bioeconomy is associated with sustainable development changes and involves transitions in both production and consumption within systems. Many of these transitions relate to using renewable resources, like forest biomass, to meet basic needs, such as food, energy and housing. However, consumers must become aware of the forest-based bioeconomy so that they can contribute to the transition. This study aims to contribute to an understanding of this matter that may lead to social acceptance of the forest-based bioeconomy and, in particular, to Swedish consumer awareness of the concept and of a particular product (wooden multi-story buildings) representing the forest-based bioeconomy. The results show consumer awareness of forest sequestration capacity but less awareness of the connection to the forest-based bioeconomy and the role of wooden multi-story buildings. The results indicate a slow transition that is hindered by path dependence and limited comprehension among consumers of the effects of their choices for a forest-based bioeconomy. This study provides valuable insights for future studies of how consumer awareness and social acceptance of the forest-based bioeconomy are interconnected.

Suggested Citation

  • Emil Nagy & Carolina Berg Rustas & Cecilia Mark-Herbert, 2021. "Social Acceptance of Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Swedish Consumers’ Perspectives on a Low Carbon Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7628-:d:590580
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7628/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7628/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank W. Geels & Frans Berkhout & Detlef P. van Vuuren, 2016. "Bridging analytical approaches for low-carbon transitions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 576-583, June.
    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. Xianzheng Gong & Zuoren Nie & Zhihong Wang & Suping Cui & Feng Gao & Tieyong Zuo, 2012. "Life Cycle Energy Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Emission of Residential Building Designs in Beijing," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(4), pages 576-587, August.
    4. Zhao, Dong-Xue & He, Bao-Jie & Johnson, Christine & Mou, Ben, 2015. "Social problems of green buildings: From the humanistic needs to social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1594-1609.
    5. Verbong, Geert & Geels, Frank, 2007. "The ongoing energy transition: Lessons from a socio-technical, multi-level analysis of the Dutch electricity system (1960-2004)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1025-1037, February.
    6. Kerstin Hemström & Leif Gustavsson & Krushna Mahapatra, 2017. "The sociotechnical regime and Swedish contractor perceptions of structural frames," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 184-195, April.
    7. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    8. Smith, Adrian & Stirling, Andy & Berkhout, Frans, 2005. "The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1491-1510, December.
    9. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    10. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    11. Dodoo, Ambrose & Gustavsson, Leif & Sathre, Roger, 2012. "Effect of thermal mass on life cycle primary energy balances of a concrete- and a wood-frame building," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 462-472.
    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. Di Letizia, Gerardo & De Lucia, Caterina & Pazienza, Pasquale & Cappelletti, Giulio Mario, 2023. "Forest bioeconomy at regional scale: A systematic literature review and future policy perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Christina-Ioanna Papadopoulou & Stavros Kalogiannidis & Efstratios Loizou & Fotios Chatzitheodoridis, 2025. "Navigating the Bioeconomy: Using Delphi-SWOT to Build Robust Strategies for Sustainable Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-22, May.
    3. Alexander Wenzel & Pablo Guindos & Manuel Carpio, 2025. "Using Timber in Mid-Rise and Tall Buildings to Construct Our Cities: A Science Mapping Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-30, February.
    4. Almut Güldemund & Vanessa Zeller, 2024. "Reflecting Regional Conditions in Circular Bioeconomy Scenarios: A Multi-Criteria Approach for Matching Technologies and Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-28, April.

    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. Timo Kaphengst & Eike Karola Velten, 2014. "Energy Transition and Behavioural Change in Rural Areas – The Role of Energy Cooperatives. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 60," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47214.
    2. Canitez, Fatih, 2019. "Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 319-329.
    3. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    4. Jano-Ito, Marco A. & Crawford-Brown, Douglas, 2016. "Socio-technical analysis of the electricity sector of Mexico: Its historical evolution and implications for a transition towards low-carbon development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 567-590.
    5. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    6. Foxon, Timothy J., 2011. "A coevolutionary framework for analysing a transition to a sustainable low carbon economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2258-2267.
    7. Zhao, Zhen-Yu & Chang, Rui-Dong & Chen, Yu-Long, 2016. "What hinder the further development of wind power in China?—A socio-technical barrier study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 465-476.
    8. Genus, Audley & Coles, Anne-Marie, 2008. "Rethinking the multi-level perspective of technological transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1436-1445, October.
    9. Sam Wilkinson & Michele John & Gregory M. Morrison, 2021. "Rooftop PV and the Renewable Energy Transition; a Review of Driving Forces and Analytical Frameworks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-25, May.
    10. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    11. Griet Juwet & Michael Ryckewaert, 2018. "Energy Transition in the Nebular City: Connecting Transition Thinking, Metabolism Studies, and Urban Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, March.
    12. Zolfagharian, Mohammadreza & Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob & Romme, A. Georges L., 2019. "Studying transitions: Past, present, and future," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    13. Zwartkruis, Joyce V. & Berg, Holger & Hof, Andries F. & Kok, Marcel T.J., 2020. "Agricultural nature conservation in the Netherlands: Three lenses on transition pathways," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Lillian Hansen & Hilde Bjørkhaug, 2017. "Visions and Expectations for the Norwegian Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Johan Schot & Laur Kanger, 2016. "Deep Transitions: Emergence, Acceleration, Stabilization and Directionality," SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    16. Sergent, Arnaud, 2014. "Sector-based political analysis of energy transition: Green shift in the forest policy regime in France," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 491-500.
    17. Edsand, Hans-Erik, 2019. "Technological innovation system and the wider context: A framework for developing countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    18. Coenen, Lars & Benneworth, Paul & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 968-979.
    19. Turnheim, Bruno & Nykvist, Björn, 2019. "Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 775-788.
    20. Alessandro Grimaldi & Antonio Lopolito & Massimo Monteleone & Piergiuseppe Morone & Maurizio Prosperi, 2009. "Wp 6: Modelling Stakeholder Interplay And Policy Scenarios For Biorefinery And Biodiesel Production," Quaderni DSEMS 02-2009, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche, Matematiche e Statistiche, Universita' di Foggia.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7628-:d:590580. 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.