IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v161y2024ics1389934124000340.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bioeconomy science collaboration between Brazil and Germany – On equal footing?

Author

Listed:
  • Mascarello, Júlia
  • Lehmann, Rosa
  • Giurca, Alexandru

Abstract

Knowledge, science, and technology are at the core of both a ‘resource-based’ and ‘knowledge-based’ bioeconomy. Collaboration in science considers varying circumstances such as resource availability and technological infrastructure. Significant investments have been mobilized for supporting research, development, and bioeconomicy innovations in Brazil. Germany, in particular, is among Brazil's most prominent bioeconomy collaborators, specifically with regard to tropical forests for their function as a carbon sink, as a site with specific atmospheric and soil conditions for research, and as a provider of forest and agricultural biomass to contribute to the setup of biomass supply chains, and biodiversity. However, North-South inequalities continue to materialize both in knowledge production and scientific work. To better understand the nature of these inequalities, we conduct an explorative empirical study on German-Brazilian scientific collaboration on bioeconomy. Building on theoretical contributions located at the interface between International Relations and Science, Technology, and Innovation studies, we propose a categorization of inequalities in science collaboration which we then use to reflect upon and contextualize the findings from our qualitative interviews with bioeconomy researchers. Our analysis indicates that interviewed researchers perceive the scientific collaboration on bioeconomy between Brazil and Germany as unequal. These inequalities range from research infrastructure to academic career opportunities. However, inequalities are heavily influenced by how the national and international bioeconomy research agenda is defined, and most importantly by whom research agendas are set. Building on these findings, we discuss how international bioeconomy research could move away from the traditional North-South dichotomy in science collaboration towards a more collaborative and inclusive research agenda setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Mascarello, Júlia & Lehmann, Rosa & Giurca, Alexandru, 2024. "Bioeconomy science collaboration between Brazil and Germany – On equal footing?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:161:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124000340
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124000340
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103181?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
    ---><---

    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. Yasmin Imparato Maximo & Mariana Hassegawa & Pieter Johannes Verkerk & André Luiz Missio, 2022. "Forest Bioeconomy in Brazil: Potential Innovative Products from the Forest Sector," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Jan Janosch Förster & Linda Downsborough & Lisa Biber-Freudenberger & Girma Kelboro Mensuro & Jan Börner, 2021. "Exploring criteria for transformative policy capacity in the context of South Africa’s biodiversity economy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 209-237, March.
    3. Cowell, Frank, 2011. "Measuring Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780199594047.
    4. Vivien, F.-D. & Nieddu, M. & Befort, N. & Debref, R. & Giampietro, M., 2019. "The Hijacking of the Bioeconomy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 189-197.
    5. Concepta McManus & Abilio Afonso Baeta Neves, 2021. "Funding research in Brazil," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 801-823, January.
    6. Wagner, Caroline S. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2005. "Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1608-1618, December.
    7. Ruggie, John Gerard, 1975. "International responses to technology: Concepts and trends," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 557-583, July.
    8. Weiss, Charles, 2005. "Science, technology and international relations," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 295-313.
    9. Rolf Meyer, 2017. "Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-32, June.
    10. Nelius Boshoff, 2009. "Neo-colonialism and research collaboration in Central Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 413-434, November.
    11. Aram Ziai, 2013. "The discourse of “development” and why the concept should be abandoned," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 123-136.
    12. Alberto Alesina & Armando Miano & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2020. "The Polarization of Reality," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 110, pages 324-328, May.
    13. Vladimir Gimpelson & Daniel Treisman, 2018. "Misperceiving inequality," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 27-54, March.
    14. Jonathan Adams & Karen Gurney & Daniel Hook & Loet Leydesdorff, 2014. "International collaboration clusters in Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 547-556, January.
    15. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S., 2008. "International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 317-325.
    16. Jungjoon Kim & Sangpil Lee & We Shim & Jongseok Kang, 2016. "A Mapping of Marine Biodiversity Research Trends and Collaboration in the East Asia Region from 1996–2015," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Jentsch, Birgit & Pilley, Catherine, 2003. "Research relationships between the South and the North: Cinderella and the ugly sisters?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(10), pages 1957-1967, November.
    18. Lovrić, Marko & Lovrić, Nataša & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Mapping forest-based bioeconomy research in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    19. Markus M. Bugge & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2016. "What Is the Bioeconomy? A Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    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. Cuestas-Caza, Javier & Toledo, Lucía & Rodríguez, Fabricio, 2024. "Transcultural bioeconomy governance in a plurinational state: Sumak Kawsay and bio-based production in two Kichwa territories of Ecuador," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).

    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. Jyoti Dua & Hiran H. Lathabai & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2023. "Measuring and characterizing research collaboration in SAARC countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1265-1294, February.
    2. Elizabeth S. Vieira, 2022. "International research collaboration in Africa: a bibliometric and thematic analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2747-2772, May.
    3. Elizabeth S. Vieira & Jorge Cerdeira, 2022. "The integration of African countries in international research networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1995-2021, April.
    4. Weiss, Gerhard & Hansen, Eric & Ludvig, Alice & Nybakk, Erlend & Toppinen, Anne, 2021. "Innovation governance in the forest sector: Reviewing concepts, trends and gaps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    5. Michael Cary & Taylor Rockwell, 2020. "International Collaboration in Open Access Publications: How Income Shapes International Collaboration," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, February.
    6. Jyoti Dua & Vivek Kumar Singh & Hiran H. Lathabai, 2023. "Measuring and characterizing international collaboration patterns in Indian scientific research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5081-5116, September.
    7. Nelius Boshoff, 2010. "South–South research collaboration of countries in the Southern African Development Community (SADC)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 481-503, August.
    8. Yuan Chih Fu & Marcelo Marques & Yuen-Hsien Tseng & Justin J. W. Powell & David P. Baker, 2022. "An evolving international research collaboration network: spatial and thematic developments in co-authored higher education research, 1998–2018," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1403-1429, March.
    9. Guns, Raf & Wang, Lili, 2017. "Detecting the emergence of new scientific collaboration links in Africa: A comparison of expected and realized collaboration intensities," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 892-903.
    10. Svein Kyvik & Ingvild Reymert, 2017. "Research collaboration in groups and networks: differences across academic fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 951-967, November.
    11. Marino, Maria & Iacono, Roberto & Mollerstrom, Johanna, 2023. "(Mis-)perceptions, information, and political polarization," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119268, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    13. Sven Wydra, 2019. "Value Chains for Industrial Biotechnology in the Bioeconomy-Innovation System Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, April.
    14. Benoit Mougenot & Jean-Pierre Doussoulin, 2022. "Conceptual evolution of the bioeconomy: a bibliometric analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1031-1047, January.
    15. A. Velez-Estevez & P. García-Sánchez & J. A. Moral-Munoz & M. J. Cobo, 2022. "Why do papers from international collaborations get more citations? A bibliometric analysis of Library and Information Science papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7517-7555, December.
    16. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2021. "Understanding Tax Policy: How do People Reason?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2309-2369.
    17. 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.
    18. Graf, Holger & Kalthaus, Martin, 2018. "International research networks: Determinants of country embeddedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1198-1214.
    19. Aashish Mehta & Patrick Herron & Yasuyuki Motoyama & Richard Appelbaum & Timothy Lenoir, 2012. "Globalization and de-globalization in nanotechnology research: the role of China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(2), pages 439-458, November.
    20. Minsoo Choi & Heejin Lee & Hanah Zoo, 2021. "Scientific knowledge production and research collaboration between Australia and South Korea: patterns and dynamics based on co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 683-706, January.

    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:forpol:v:161:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124000340. 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/forpol .

    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.