IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ubzefd/275071.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Governance of the bioeconomy: A global comparative study of national bioeconomy strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Dietz, Thomas
  • Börner, Jan
  • Förster, Jan Janosch
  • von Braun, Joachim

Abstract

More than forty states worldwide currently pursue explicit political strategies to expand and promote their bioeconomies. This paper assesses these strategies in the context of the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Our theoretical framework differentiates between four pathways of bioeconomic developments. The extent, to which bioeconomic developments along these pathways lead to increased sustainability, depends on the creation of effective governance mechanisms. We distinguish between enabling governance and constraining governance as the two fundamental political challenges in setting up an effective governance framework for a sustainable bioeconomy. Further, we lay out a taxonomy of political support measures (enabling governance) and regulatory tools (constraining governance) that states can use to confront these two political challenges. Guided by this theoretical framework, we conduct a qualitative content analysis of 41 national bioeconomy strategies to provide systematic answers to the question of how well designed the individual national bioeconomy strategies are to ensure the rise of a sustainable bioeconomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Dietz, Thomas & Börner, Jan & Förster, Jan Janosch & von Braun, Joachim, 2018. "Governance of the bioeconomy: A global comparative study of national bioeconomy strategies," Discussion Papers 275071, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ubzefd:275071
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.275071
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/275071/files/ZEF_DP_264.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.275071?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Smeets, Edward & Tabeau, Andrzej & van Berkum, Siemen & Moorad, Jamil & van Meijl, Hans & Woltjer, Geert, 2014. "The impact of the rebound effect of the use of first generation biofuels in the EU on greenhouse gas emissions: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 393-403.
    3. Unruh, Gregory C., 2002. "Escaping carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 317-325, March.
    4. Stephan Dabbert & Iris Lewandowski & Jochen Weiss & Andreas Pyka (ed.), 2017. "Knowledge-Driven Developments in the Bioeconomy," Economic Complexity and Evolution, Springer, number 978-3-319-58374-7, December.
    5. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    6. 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.
    7. Rick Bosman & Jan Rotmans, 2016. "Transition Governance towards a Bioeconomy: A Comparison of Finland and The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Gawel, Erik & Purkus, Alexandra & Pannicke, Nadine & Hagemann, Nina, 2016. "Die Governance der Bioökonomie: Herausforderungen einer Nachhaltigkeitstransformation am Beispiel der holzbasierten Bioökonomie in Deutschland," UFZ Discussion Papers 2/2016, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    9. Unruh, Gregory C., 2000. "Understanding carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 817-830, October.
    10. Joachim Braun & Regina Birner, 2017. "Designing Global Governance for Agricultural Development and Food and Nutrition Security," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 265-284, May.
    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. Pannicke, Nadine & Gawe, Erik & Hagemann, Nina & Purkus, Alexandra & Strunz, Sebastian, 2015. "The Political Economy of Fostering a Wood-based Bioeconomy in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 64(04), December.
    13. Johan Swinnen & Olivia Riera, 2013. "The global bio-economy," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 1-5, November.
    14. Stone Sweet, Alex, 1999. "Judicialization and the Construction of Governance," Center for Culture, Organizations and Politics, Working Paper Series qt2fc6571w, Center for Culture, Organizations and Politics of theInstitute for Research on Labor and Employment, UC Berkeley.
    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. 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.
    2. Nina Hagemann & Erik Gawel & Alexandra Purkus & Nadine Pannicke & Jennifer Hauck, 2016. "Possible Futures towards a Wood-Based Bioeconomy: A Scenario Analysis for Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Alexandra Gottinger & Luana Ladu & Rainer Quitzow, 2020. "Studying the Transition towards a Circular Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Transition Studies and Existing Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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).
    12. Urmetzer, Sophie & Lask, Jan & Vargas-Carpintero, Ricardo & Pyka, Andreas, 2020. "Learning to change: Transformative knowledge for building a sustainable bioeconomy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    13. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    14. 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.
    15. Steffen S. Bettin, 2020. "Electricity infrastructure and innovation in the next phase of energy transition—amendments to the technology innovation system framework," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 371-395, November.
    16. Zhao, Congyu & Wang, Jianda & Dong, Kangyin & Wang, Kun, 2023. "How does renewable energy encourage carbon unlocking? A global case for decarbonization," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    17. Claudia Kettner-Marx & Daniela Kletzan-Slamanig, 2016. "Österreich 2025 – Umweltinnovationen in Österreich. Performance und Erfolgsfaktoren," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58860.
    18. Francesco Lamperti & Giovanni Dosi & Mauro Napoletano & Andrea Roventini & Alessandro Sapio, 2018. "And then he wasn't a she : Climate change and green transitions in an agent-based integrated assessment model," Working Papers hal-03443464, HAL.
    19. Curci, Ylenia & Mongeau Ospina, Christian A., 2016. "Investigating biofuels through network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 60-72.
    20. Vincent Smith & Justus H. H. Wesseler & David Zilberman, 2021. "New Plant Breeding Technologies: An Assessment of the Political Economy of the Regulatory Environment and Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Public Economics; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:ubzefd:275071. 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/zefbnde.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.