IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v164y2024ics1389934124001023.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pulp addiction? Perspectives of local regime actors on the development of the growing pulp industry in Uruguay

Author

Listed:
  • Tahvanainen, Veera
  • Laakkonen, Anu
  • Pesälä, Ossi
  • Pittaluga, Lucía
  • Hujala, Teppo
  • Pykäläinen, Jouni

Abstract

The pulp and paper industry is one of the largest industries in the world. The main actors are a few multi-national enterprises operating in global markets. The industry is increasingly moving its production to the Global South, which alters global pulp value chains and the national socio-technical regimes of those countries. Additionally, the sustainability paradigm and transition to bioeconomy are challenging the pulp and paper industry of today. We conducted semi-structured expert interviews, analyzed, and interpreted the findings through the multi-level perspective framework. The study aims to advance knowledge on how the local regime actors inside the pulp regime perceive the development of the Uruguayan pulp industry since the MNEs established operations in Uruguay until 2018. Our findings suggest that local regime actors see that the Uruguayan pulp industry regime and its' development is highly influenced by multinational enterprises and the way they organized their global value chains. Uruguay's role in the global pulp industry value chain remains as a material resource provider, which has not improved the innovation capacity of the country particularly. The interviewees however feel that this is a key issue to develop in the country. Thus, we suggest that a transition to a sustainable bioeconomy in Uruguay would require steps forward in the immaterial resource base with closer cooperation between the industrial actors, the national research and education actors, and local small and medium-sized enterprises. In large-scale Global North–Global South investments a true collaboration between the multi-national enterprises and local regime actors is crucial for reaching a strongly sustainable bioeconomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Tahvanainen, Veera & Laakkonen, Anu & Pesälä, Ossi & Pittaluga, Lucía & Hujala, Teppo & Pykäläinen, Jouni, 2024. "Pulp addiction? Perspectives of local regime actors on the development of the growing pulp industry in Uruguay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:164:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001023
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001023
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103248?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. Figueiredo, Paulo N., 2016. "Evolution of the short-fiber technological trajectory in Brazil's pulp and paper industry: The role of firm-level innovative capability-building and indigenous institutions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-14.
    2. Hans-Jürgen Burchardt & Kristina Dietz, 2014. "(Neo-)extractivism – a new challenge for development theory from Latin America," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 468-486, March.
    3. Lara Gonzalez-Porras & Anna Heikkinen & Johanna Kujala, 2021. "Understanding stakeholder influence: lessons from a controversial megaproject," International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(2/3), pages 191-213.
    4. Mijailoff, Julián Daniel & Burns, Sarah Lilian, 2023. "Fixing the meaning of floating signifier: Discourses and network analysis in the bioeconomy policy processes in Argentina and Uruguay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. Aboal, Diego & Rovira, Flavia & Veneri, Federico, 2018. "Knowledge networks for innovation in the forestry sector: Multinational companies in Uruguay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 9-20.
    6. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    7. Daniel Kefeli & Karen M. Siegel & Lucía Pittaluga & Thomas Dietz, 2023. "Environmental policy integration in a newly established natural resource-based sector: the role of advocacy coalitions and contrasting conceptions of sustainability," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(1), pages 69-93, March.
    8. Mijailoff, Julián Daniel & Giessen, Lukas & Burns, Sarah Lilian, 2023. "Local to global escalation of land use conflicts: Long-term dynamics on social movements protests against pulp mills and plantation forests in Argentina and Uruguay," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    9. Geels, Frank W., 2010. "Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 495-510, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Susanna Myllylä & Tuomo Takala, 2011. "Leaking legitimacies: the Finnish forest sector's entanglement in the land conflicts of Atlantic coastal Brazil," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(1), pages 42-60, March.
    12. 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.
    13. Guerrero, Jose E. & Hansen, Eric, 2021. "Company-level cross-sector collaborations in transition to the bioeconomy: A multi-case study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    14. Morales Olmos, Virginia, 2022. "Forestry and the forest products sector: Production, income and employment, and international trade," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    15. Smith, Adrian & Voß, Jan-Peter & Grin, John, 2010. "Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-448, May.
    16. Temmes, Armi & Peck, Philip, 2020. "Do forest biorefineries fit with working principles of a circular bioeconomy? A case of Finnish and Swedish initiatives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    17. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    18. 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.
    19. Bob Giddings & Bill Hopwood & Geoff O'Brien, 2002. "Environment, economy and society: fitting them together into sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 187-196.
    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. Catia Milena Lopes & Annibal José Scavarda & Mauricio Nunes Macedo de Carvalho & André Luis Korzenowski, 2018. "The Business Model and Innovation Analyses: The Sustainable Transition Obstacles and Drivers for the Hospital Supply Chains," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Catia Milena Lopes & Annibal José Scavarda & Guilherme Luís Roehe Vaccaro & Christopher Rosa Pohlmann & André Luis Korzenowski, 2018. "Perspective of Business Models and Innovation for Sustainability Transition in Hospitals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Kirsi Hyttinen & Sampsa Ruutu & Mika Nieminen & Faiz Gallouj & Marja Toivonen, 2014. "A system dynamic and multi-criteria evaluation of innovations in environmental services," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(3), pages 29-52.
    4. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    5. Kvellheim, Ann Kristin, 2017. "The power of buildings in climate change mitigation: The case of Norway," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 653-661.
    6. Katherine A. Daniell & Jean-Daniel Rinaudo & Noel Chan & Céline Nauges & Quentin Grafton, 2015. "Understanding and Managing Urban Water in Transition," Post-Print hal-01183846, HAL.
    7. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Binz, Christian, 2017. "Global socio-technical regimes," Papers in Innovation Studies 2017/1, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    8. Hassan Qudrat-Ullah & Mark McCarthy Akrofi & Aymen Kayal, 2020. "Analyzing Actors’ Engagement in Sustainable Energy Planning at the Local Level in Ghana: An Empirical Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, April.
    9. Katherine Daniell & Jean-Daniel Rinaudo & Noel Wai Wah Chan & Céline Nauges & Quentin Grafton, 2015. "Understanding and Managing Urban Water in Transition," Post-Print hal-01290502, HAL.
    10. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Binz, Christian, 2018. "Global socio-technical regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 735-749.
    11. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    12. Francisco Chicombo, Adélia Filosa & Musango, Josephine Kaviti, 2022. "Towards a theoretical framework for gendered energy transition at the urban household level: A case of Mozambique," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    13. Manning, Stephan & Reinecke, Juliane, 2016. "A modular governance architecture in-the-making: How transnational standard-setters govern sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 618-633.
    14. Lachman, Daniël A., 2013. "A survey and review of approaches to study transitions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 269-276.
    15. Nhat Strøm-Andersen, 2019. "Incumbents in the Transition Towards the Bioeconomy: The Role of Dynamic Capabilities and Innovation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    16. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    17. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    18. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    19. Jordi Molas-Gallart & Alejandra Boni & Sandro Giachi & Johan Schot, 2021. "A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies [The Need for Reflexive Evaluation Approaches in Development Cooperation]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 431-442.
    20. Vincent-Paul Sanon & Raymond Ouedraogo & Patrice Toé & Hamid El Bilali & Erwin Lautsch & Stefan Vogel & Andreas H. Melcher, 2021. "Socio-Economic Perspectives of Transition in Inland Fisheries and Fish Farming in a Least Developed Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-34, March.

    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:164:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001023. 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.