IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v39y2011i7p4051-4066.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Striving to further harmonization of sustainability criteria for bioenergy in Europe: Recommendations from a stakeholder questionnaire

Author

Listed:
  • van Dam, J.
  • Junginger, M.

Abstract

This questionnaire analyzed the ongoing development of sustainability criteria for solid and liquid bioenergy in the European Union and further actions needed to come to a harmonization of certification systems, based on EU stakeholder views. The questionnaire, online from February to August 2009, received 473 responses collected from 25 EU member countries and 9 non-European countries; 285 could be used for further processing. A large majority of all stakeholders (81%) indicated that a harmonized certification system for biomass and bioenergy is needed, albeit some limitations. Amongst them, there is agreement that (i) a criterion on 'minimization of GHG emissions' should be included in a certification system for biomass and bioenergy, (ii) criteria on optimization of energy and on water conservation are considered of high relevance, (iii) the large variety of geographical areas, crops, residues, production processes and end-uses limits development towards a harmonized certification system for sustainable biomass and bioenergy in Europe, (iv) making better use of existing certification systems and standards improves further development of a harmonized European biomass and bioenergy sustainability certification system and (v) it is important to link a European certification system to international declarations and to expand such a system to other world regions.

Suggested Citation

  • van Dam, J. & Junginger, M., 2011. "Striving to further harmonization of sustainability criteria for bioenergy in Europe: Recommendations from a stakeholder questionnaire," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 4051-4066, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:7:p:4051-4066
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511002023
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    2. van Dam, J. & Junginger, M. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2010. "From the global efforts on certification of bioenergy towards an integrated approach based on sustainable land use planning," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 2445-2472, December.
    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. Jim Philp, 2021. "Biotechnologies to Bridge the Schism in the Bioeconomy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    2. Scott, James A. & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K., 2013. "Strategic sourcing in the UK bioenergy industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 478-490.
    3. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    4. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Can microalgae biodiesel contribute to achieve the sustainability objectives in the transport sector in France by 2030? A comparison between first, second and third generation biofuels though a range-," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1032-1046.
    5. Tapio Ranta & Antti Karhunen & Mika Laihanen, 2020. "Sustainability of Forest-Based Bioenergy—A Case Study of Students Surveyed at a University in Finland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-13, July.
    6. Gillian Eggleston & Isabel Lima, 2015. "Sustainability Issues and Opportunities in the Sugar and Sugar-Bioproduct Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-27, September.
    7. Tanvir Ahmed & Bashir Ahmad, 2014. "Burning of Crop Residue and its Potential for Electricity Generation," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 53(3), pages 275-292.
    8. Jiang, Dong & Zhuang, Dafang & Fu, Jinying & Huang, Yaohuan & Wen, Kege, 2012. "Bioenergy potential from crop residues in China: Availability and distribution," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 1377-1382.
    9. Pacini, Henrique & Assunção, Lucas & van Dam, Jinke & Toneto, Rudinei, 2013. "The price for biofuels sustainability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 898-903.
    10. Alakangas, E. & Junginger, M. & van Dam, J. & Hinge, J. & Keränen, J. & Olsson, O. & Porsö, C. & Martikainen, A. & Rathbauer, J. & Sulzbacher, L. & Vesterinen, P. & Vinterbäck, J., 2012. "EUBIONET III—Solutions to biomass trade and market barriers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 4277-4290.
    11. Gamborg, Christian & Anker, Helle Tegner & Sandøe, Peter, 2014. "Ethical and legal challenges in bioenergy governance: Coping with value disagreement and regulatory complexity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 326-333.
    12. Brinkman, Marnix L.J. & Wicke, Birka & Faaij, André P.C. & van der Hilst, Floor, 2019. "Projecting socio-economic impacts of bioenergy: Current status and limitations of ex-ante quantification methods," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    13. Hoefnagels, Ric & Resch, Gustav & Junginger, Martin & Faaij, André, 2014. "International and domestic uses of solid biofuels under different renewable energy support scenarios in the European Union," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 139-157.
    14. Alsaleh, Mohd & Abdul-Rahim, A.S. & Mohd-Shahwahid, H.O., 2017. "Determinants of technical efficiency in the bioenergy industry in the EU28 region," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1331-1349.
    15. Goodwin, Daniel & Gale, Fred & Lovell, Heather & Beasy, Kim & Murphy, Hannah & Schoen, Marion, 2024. "Sustainability certification for renewable hydrogen: An international survey of energy professionals," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    16. Fridahl, Mathias, 2017. "Socio-political prioritization of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 89-99.

    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. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    2. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    3. Batidzirai, B. & Smeets, E.M.W. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2012. "Harmonising bioenergy resource potentials—Methodological lessons from review of state of the art bioenergy potential assessments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(9), pages 6598-6630.
    4. Antonio Lopolito & Edgardo Sica, 2022. "Designing Policy Mixes to Address the World’s Worst Devastation of a Rural Landscape Caused by Xylella Epidemic," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-14, May.
    5. Andrés Lorente de las Casas & Ivelina Mirkova & Francisco J. Ramos-Real, 2021. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions of the Possible Energy Sustainability Solutions in the Hotels of the Canary Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-26, June.
    6. van der Hilst, F. & Lesschen, J.P. & van Dam, J.M.C. & Riksen, M. & Verweij, P.A. & Sanders, J.P.M. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2012. "Spatial variation of environmental impacts of regional biomass chains," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 2053-2069.
    7. Marleen Kraaij-Dirkzwager & Joost Van der Ree & Erik Lebret, 2017. "Rapid Assessment of Stakeholder Concerns about Public Health. An Introduction to a Fast and Inexpensive Approach Applied on Health Concerns about Intensive Animal Production Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Venus, Terese E. & Strauss, Felix & Venus, Thomas J. & Sauer, Johannes, 2021. "Understanding stakeholder preferences for future biogas development in Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    9. Pacini, Henrique & Assunção, Lucas & van Dam, Jinke & Toneto, Rudinei, 2013. "The price for biofuels sustainability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 898-903.
    10. Sarah L. Stattman & Aarti Gupta, 2015. "Negotiating Authority in Global Biofuel Governance: Brazil and the EU in the WTO," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 41-59, February.
    11. Ramirez-Contreras, Nidia Elizabeth & Faaij, André P.C., 2018. "A review of key international biomass and bioenergy sustainability frameworks and certification systems and their application and implications in Colombia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 460-478.
    12. León-Vielma, J.E. & Ramos-Real, F.J. & Hernández Hernández, J.F. & Rodríguez-Brito, María Gracia, 2023. "An integrative strategy for Venezuela's electricity sector (VES), from an analysis of stakeholder perspectives," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Kluts, Ingeborg & Wicke, Birka & Leemans, Rik & Faaij, André, 2017. "Sustainability constraints in determining European bioenergy potential: A review of existing studies and steps forward," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 719-734.
    14. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Elliott, Chris, 2016. "Forest Stewardship Council certification for forest ecosystem services: An analysis of stakeholder adaptability," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 91-98.
    15. van Exel, Job & Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & Donaldson, Cam & Brouwer, Werner, 2015. "Public views on principles for health care priority setting: Findings of a European cross-country study using Q methodology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 128-137.
    16. Soloviy, Ihor & Melnykovych, Mariana & Björnsen Gurung, Astrid & Hewitt, Richard J. & Ustych, Radmila & Maksymiv, Lyudmyla & Brang, Peter & Meessen, Heino & Kaflyk, Mariia, 2019. "Innovation in the use of wood energy in the Ukrainian Carpathians: Opportunities and threats for rural communities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 160-169.
    17. Rachel Baker & John Wildman & Helen Mason & Cam Donaldson, 2014. "Q‐Ing For Health—A New Approach To Eliciting The Public'S Views On Health Care Resource Allocation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 283-297, March.
    18. Milazzo, M.F. & Spina, F. & Cavallaro, S. & Bart, J.C.J., 2013. "Sustainable soy biodiesel," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 806-852.
    19. E.O. Marfo & L. Chen & H. Xuhua & H.A. Antwi & E. Yiranbon, 2015. "Corporate Social Responsibility: Driving Dynamics on Firm’s Profitability in Ghana," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 5(3), pages 116-132, July.
    20. Behnam Taebi, 2017. "Bridging the Gap between Social Acceptance and Ethical Acceptability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(10), pages 1817-1827, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Certification Bioenergy Europe;

    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:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:7:p:4051-4066. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.