Consensus, caveats and conditions: International learnings for bioeconomy development

Abstract Diverse national resource bases, infrastructure, regulatory environments and markets call for the development of diverse national bioeconomies in the quest towards cleaner production and a more sustainable future. The bioeconomy promises both economic growth and environmental gain through the conversion of renewable biological resources into the food, feed, fuel, chemicals and fibre of the future. It has been the topic of intense political discussion internationally of late, including in Ireland. Radical innovation is required to achieve these aims, not just in technological terms, but in the policies, practices, collaborations and behaviours guiding this transition. Effective, objective and impartial governance of the bioeconomy is required; a process that must engage multiple stakeholder groups in deciphering the most appropriate development pathways with the aim of creating evidence-based and diverse national bioeconomy strategies. Showcasing a potential fora to achieve such stakeholder inclusion and interaction, this paper presents the results of an online Delphi study conducted with 75 bioeconomy experts in Ireland to assesses and prioritise value chain opportunities for the Irish bioeconomy. Results nevertheless hold relevance for the development and governance of bioeconomies worldwide, highlighting a number of areas of consensus, caveats and conditions for bioeconomy, and associated strategy, development. This includes consideration of factors from supply to demand, including the scale and fragmentation of feedstock, the capital investment required at the transformation technology stage and consumer acceptance of the biobased output. The need for robust environmental sustainability assessments, clear support frameworks, adherence to cascading and circular principles and integrated value web approaches are also highlighted through this analysis. The bioeconomy can be successful economically, environmentally and socially if developed under certain conditions, and there is potential for nations to learn from one another as to what these conditions might encompass.

[1]  Erik Gawel,et al.  Towards a sustainable innovation system for the German wood-based bioeconomy: Implications for policy design , 2018 .

[2]  Marit Aursand,et al.  Cascading Norwegian co-streams for bioeconomic transition , 2018 .

[3]  J. Braun,et al.  Policy: Five cornerstones of a global bioeconomy , 2016, Nature.

[4]  Ciupagea Constantin,et al.  Bioeconomy and sustainability: a potential contribution to the Bioeconomy Observatory , 2013 .

[5]  F. Hasson,et al.  Enhancing rigour in the Delphi technique research , 2011 .

[6]  Ann Crabbé,et al.  The handbook of environmental policy evaluation , 2008 .

[7]  Lars Coenen,et al.  Innovation Policy for Grand Challenges. An Economic Geography Perspective , 2015 .

[8]  Kes McCormick,et al.  The Bioeconomy in Europe: An Overview , 2013 .

[9]  Annukka Näyhä.  Towards bioeconomy : a three-phase Delphi study on forest biorefinery diffusion in Scandinavia and North America , 2012 .

[10]  N. M. Idaikkadar,et al.  CHAPTER 10 – Census of Agriculture , 1979 .

[11]  Y. Papadopoulos.  Problems of Democratic Accountability in Network and Multilevel Governance , 2007, Borders and Margins.

[12]  Andreas Pyka,et al.  From commodity-based value chains to biomass-based value webs: The case of sugarcane in Brazil’s bioeconomy , 2018 .

[13]  Carlo Ingrao,et al.  Agricultural and forest biomass for food, materials and energy: bio-economy as the cornerstone to cleaner production and more sustainable consumption patterns for accelerating the transition towards equitable, sustainable, post fossil-carbon societies , 2016 .

[14]  M. Bassey.  Pedagogic Research: on the relative merits of search for generalisation and study of single events , 1981 .

[15]  R. D. Needham,et al.  Moving best practice forward: delphi characteristics, advantages, potential problems, and solutions. , 2009 .

[16]  G. Brunori.  Biomass, Biovalue and Sustainability: Some Thoughts on the Definition of the Bioeconomy , 2013 .

[17]  Guenther Fischer,et al.  Global Agro-Ecological Zones Assessment: Methodology and Results , 2000 .

[18]  F. Hasson,et al.  Consulting the oracle: ten lessons from using the Delphi technique in nursing research. , 2006, Journal of advanced nursing.

[19]  Philipp Späth,et al.  A forest-based bioeconomy for Germany? Strengths, weaknesses and policy options for lignocellulosic biorefineries , 2017 .

[20]  P. Marchand,et al.  Forecasting the deployment of short-rotation intensive culture of willow or hybrid poplar: Insights from a Delphi study , 2014 .

[21]  Antje Potthast,et al.  Sustainable Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries in the Bioeconomy - A Challenge for Europe , 2015 .

[22]  I. Lewandowski.  Securing a sustainable biomass supply in a growing bioeconomy , 2015 .

[23]  Chia-Chien Hsu,et al.  The Delphi Technique: Making Sense of Consensus , 2007 .

[24]  Cheryl Tatano Beck,et al.  Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. , 2010, International journal of nursing studies.

[25]  David Zilberman,et al.  Technology and the Future Bioeconomy , 2013 .

[26]  M. Henchion,et al.  Good Governance in the Bioeconomy , 2017 .

[27]  Markus M. Bugge,et al.  What Is the Bioeconomy? A Review of the Literature , 2016 .

[28]  Helga Pülzl,et al.  Sustainable development – A ‘selling point’ of the emerging EU bioeconomy policy framework? , 2018 .

[29]  K. McCormick,et al.  Strategies and Policies for the Bioeconomy and Bio-Based Economy: An Analysis of Official National Approaches , 2013 .

[30]  M. Henchion,et al.  If Opportunity Doesn’t Knock, Build a Door: Reflecting on a Bioeconomy Policy Agenda for Ireland , 2017 .

[31]  B. Hansjürgens,et al.  Soil governance in the transition towards a sustainable bioeconomy – A review , 2018 .

[32]  Barbara Ribeiro,et al.  Transitions in biofuel technologies: : An appraisal of the social impacts of cellulosic ethanol using the Delphi method , 2015 .

[33]  I. Darnhofer,et al.  Socio-technical transitions in farming: key concepts. , 2015 .

[34]  R. Meyer.  Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates , 2017 .

[35]  Teppo Hujala,et al.  Policy experts' propensity to change their opinion along Delphi rounds , 2016 .

[36]  Andrew D.F. Price,et al.  Conceptualizing stakeholder engagement in the context of sustainability and its assessment , 2008 .

[37]  A.J.M. Smits,et al.  Visions of Sustainability in Bioeconomy Research , 2014 .

[38]  George Wright,et al.  The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis , 1999 .

[39]  Consumer interests in food processing waste management and co-product recovery , 2007 .

[40]  M. Porter.  Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance , 1985 .

[41]  V. Žabkar,et al.  Willingness to act and environmentally conscious consumer behaviour: can prosocial status perceptions help overcome the gap? , 2013 .