IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa11p1413.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Biomass production and land use management in the Italian context: regulations, conflicts, and impacts

Author

Listed:
  • Elena Gissi

    ()

  • Giuseppina Siciliano

Abstract

Renewable energy sources, such as biomass can make a positive impact on climate change phenomenon by decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels. The use of biomass energy is directly linked to the use of the land, from which biomass feedstock is obtained, such as farm land and forests, and its ecosystem services. The biomass production and the use of land and ecosystem services are usually associated with a wide range of environmental and social impacts, depending on what choices are made regarding what types of biomass are used, as well as where and how they are produced. Choosing management practices that minimize negative impacts and complement planning policies and energy production objectives is often associated with land-use conflicts among both different institutional levels, local, national and European, and different social actors. Yet, European Directive 2009/28/CE establishes that the energy production from renewable energy by 2020, as well as from biofuel, defined for each member state (Annex 1), must be achieved through a "sustainable" production. Such definition is assigned to national and local contexts, arising issues in policy making, conflicts analysis and methodologies. The present paper discusses on the recent acknowledgment of the above mentioned EU directive in several Italian Regions, such as Puglia and Marche, which have defined regulations/guidelines regarding their potential contribution to the national objectives of production and consumption of energy from renewable sources (EFR). Moreover, the present paper confronts such regulations with results found in literature. Several analyses have been done on the energy production from biomass based on technical and economic aspects of the problem. However, few studies have applied integrated approaches able to take into consideration crucial aspects such as biodiversity conservation and landscape fragmentation, as required by EU Directive 2009/28/CE, side by side with the economic and social dimensions. This paper aims at filling this gap proposing the application of an integrated framework of analysis, based on multi-criteria approaches able to take into consideration socio-economic, environmental and landscape criteria, as well as institutional and social conflicts linked to the biomass production.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena Gissi & Giuseppina Siciliano, 2011. "Biomass production and land use management in the Italian context: regulations, conflicts, and impacts," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1413, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa11p1413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa11/e110830aFinal01413.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Using Innovation Surveys for Econometric Analysis," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Philippe Askenazy & Nicolas Berman & Gilbert Cette & Laurent Eymard, 2012. "Credit Constraints And The Cyclicality Of R&D Investment: Evidence From France," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(5), pages 1001-1024, October.
    3. Arellano, Manuel & Bover, Olympia, 1995. "Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-51, July.
    4. Borje Johansson & Hans Loof, 2008. "Innovation Activities Explained By Firm Attributes And Location," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 533-552.
    5. Rauch James E., 1993. "Productivity Gains from Geographic Concentration of Human Capital: Evidence from the Cities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 380-400, November.
    6. Hans Loof & Almas Heshmati, 2006. "On the relationship between innovation and performance: A sensitivity analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 317-344.
    7. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    8. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2007. "Patents and patent policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 568-587, Winter.
    9. Börje Johansson & John Quigley, 2003. "Agglomeration and networks in spatial economies," Economics of Governance, Springer, pages 165-176.
    10. Pontus Braunerhjelm, 2008. "Specialization of Regions and Universities: The New Versus the Old," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 253-275.
    11. James Simmie, 2003. "Innovation and Urban Regions as National and International Nodes for the Transfer and Sharing of Knowledge," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(6-7), pages 607-620.
    12. Edward L. Glaeser & Joshua D. Gottlieb, 2009. "The Wealth of Cities: Agglomeration Economies and Spatial Equilibrium in the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, pages 983-1028.
    13. Tor Jakob Klette & Samuel Kortum, 2004. "Innovating Firms and Aggregate Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, pages 986-1018.
    14. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, pages 569-594.
    15. Uwe Cantner, Jens J. Krüger, 2002. "Geroski's Stylized Facts and Mobility in Large German Manufacturing Firms," Working Paper Series B 2002-03, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultïät.
    16. Uwe Cantner & Jens J. Krüger, 2004. "Geroski's Stylized Facts and Mobility of Large German Manufacturing Firms," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 24(3), pages 267-283, May.
    17. repec:pse:psecon:2008-26 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Tor Jakob Klette & Arvid Raknerud, 2005. "Heterogeneity, productivity and selection: an empirical study of Norwegian manufacturing firms," Discussion Papers 401, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    19. Elena Cefis & Matteo Ciccarelli, 2005. "Profit differentials and innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 43-61.
    20. Johansson, Börje & Forslund, Ulla, 2006. "The Analysis Of Location, Co-Location And Urbanisation Economies," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 67, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    21. Charlie Karlsson & Börje Johansson, 2012. "Knowledge, Creativity and Regional Development," Chapters,in: The Regional Economics of Knowledge and Talent, chapter 2 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, pages 569-594.
    23. Martin Andersson & Hans Lˆˆf, 2009. "Learning-by-Exporting Revisited: The Role of Intensity and Persistence," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(4), pages 893-916, December.
    24. Edward L. Glaeser & Joshua D. Gottlieb, 2009. "The Wealth of Cities: Agglomeration Economies and Spatial Equilibrium in the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, pages 983-1028.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa11p1413. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gunther Maier). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.