IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v91y2020ics0264837719316655.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The trends in bioeconomy development in the European Union: Exploiting capacity and productivity measures based on the land footprint approach

Author

Listed:
  • Liobikiene, Genovaite
  • Chen, Xueli
  • Streimikiene, Dalia
  • Balezentis, Tomas

Abstract

Bioeconomy comprises a novel approach towards economic development in the European Union (EU). Its development should be confined by the planetary boundaries (biocapacity). We integrate the land footprint approach related to production and land biocapacity to assess the trends in capacity and productivity of bioeconomy in the EU countries throughout 1997–2013. Results show that the level of production-based land footprint and land biocapacity vary across the EU countries. However, Belgium is the sole case where production-based land footprint exceeds land biocapacity. The highest possibilities for development of the bioeconomy sector are observed for Slovenia, Croatia, Romania and Slovakia. Meanwhile, Estonia, Denmark and the United Kingdom have almost achieved the level of land biocapacity. Considering the catch up growth rate, almost all of the EU countries (with exception of Greece, France, Italy and Romania) show increasing footprint-to-biocapacity ratios with the highest values for Estonia and Latvia. The significant absolute decoupling between production-based land footprint and agricultural value added is observed in Denmark. Meanwhile, Italy, Lithuania and Spain show relative decoupling. Thus, these countries should pay particular attention to productivity improvements in forestry and agriculture. This study contributes to setting the targets for bioeconomy policy that can support the sustainable and efficient use of biological resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Liobikiene, Genovaite & Chen, Xueli & Streimikiene, Dalia & Balezentis, Tomas, 2020. "The trends in bioeconomy development in the European Union: Exploiting capacity and productivity measures based on the land footprint approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:91:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719316655
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104375
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719316655
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104375?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. Matteo De Besi & Kes McCormick, 2015. "Towards a Bioeconomy in Europe: National, Regional and Industrial Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Harry Wilting & Kees Vringer, 2009. "CARBON AND LAND USE ACCOUNTING FROM A PRODUCER'S AND A cONSUMER'S PERSPECTIVE - AN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION COVERING THE WORLD," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 291-310.
    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. Kitzes, Justin & Galli, Alessandro & Bagliani, Marco & Barrett, John & Dige, Gorm & Ede, Sharon & Erb, Karlheinz & Giljum, Stefan & Haberl, Helmut & Hails, Chris & Jolia-Ferrier, Laurent & Jungwirth, , 2009. "A research agenda for improving national Ecological Footprint accounts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1991-2007, May.
    5. Bithas, K. & Kalimeris, P., 2013. "Re-estimating the decoupling effect: Is there an actual transition towards a less energy-intensive economy?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 78-84.
    6. Stefania Bracco & Ozgul Calicioglu & Marta Gomez San Juan & Alessandro Flammini, 2018. "Assessing the Contribution of Bioeconomy to the Total Economy: A Review of National Frameworks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, May.
    7. Kai Fang & Reinout Heijungs & Zheng Duan & Geert R. De Snoo, 2015. "The Environmental Sustainability of Nations: Benchmarking the Carbon, Water and Land Footprints against Allocated Planetary Boundaries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-21, August.
    8. Tapio, Petri, 2005. "Towards a theory of decoupling: degrees of decoupling in the EU and the case of road traffic in Finland between 1970 and 2001," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 137-151, March.
    9. Kes McCormick & Niina Kautto, 2013. "The Bioeconomy in Europe: An Overview," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-20, June.
    10. Kumar, Surender & Khanna, Madhu, 2009. "Measurement of environmental efficiency and productivity: a cross-country analysis," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 473-495, August.
    11. Vincent Egenolf & Stefan Bringezu, 2019. "Conceptualization of an Indicator System for Assessing the Sustainability of the Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, January.
    12. Kant, Chander, 2019. "Income convergence and the catch-up index," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 613-627.
    13. Johan Rockström & Will Steffen & Kevin Noone & Åsa Persson & F. Stuart Chapin & Eric F. Lambin & Timothy M. Lenton & Marten Scheffer & Carl Folke & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber & Björn Nykvist & Cynthia , 2009. "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7263), pages 472-475, September.
    14. Daly, Herman E., 1990. "Toward some operational principles of sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-6, April.
    15. Jonathan A. Foley & Navin Ramankutty & Kate A. Brauman & Emily S. Cassidy & James S. Gerber & Matt Johnston & Nathaniel D. Mueller & Christine O’Connell & Deepak K. Ray & Paul C. West & Christian Balz, 2011. "Solutions for a cultivated planet," Nature, Nature, vol. 478(7369), pages 337-342, October.
    16. Pulighe, Giuseppe & Bonati, Guido & Colangeli, Marco & Morese, Maria Michela & Traverso, Lorenzo & Lupia, Flavio & Khawaja, Cosette & Janssen, Rainer & Fava, Francesco, 2019. "Ongoing and emerging issues for sustainable bioenergy production on marginal lands in the Mediterranean regions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 58-70.
    17. Péter Halmai & Viktória Vásáry, 2010. "Real convergence in the new Member States of the European Union (Shorter and longer term prospects)," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 7(1), pages 229-253, June.
    18. Bruckner, Martin & Fischer, Günther & Tramberend, Sylvia & Giljum, Stefan, 2015. "Measuring telecouplings in the global land system: A review and comparative evaluation of land footprint accounting methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 11-21.
    19. Tévécia Ronzon & Robert M’Barek, 2018. "Socioeconomic Indicators to Monitor the EU’s Bioeconomy in Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-22, May.
    20. Liobikienė, Genovaitė & Dagiliūtė, Renata, 2016. "The relationship between economic and carbon footprint changes in EU: The achievements of the EU sustainable consumption and production policy implementation," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 204-211.
    21. Valeria Andreoni & Arto Inaki & Jose Manuel Rueda Cantuche & Genty Aurelien & Villanueva Krzyzaniak Alejandro, 2012. "Global Resources Use and Pollution: Vol. I, Production, Consumption and Trade (1995-2008)," JRC Research Reports JRC71919, Joint Research Centre.
    22. Imbert, Enrica & Ladu, Luana & Morone, Piergiuseppe & Quitzow, Rainer, 2017. "Policy strategies for a transition to a bioeconomy in Europe: the case of Italy and Germany," MPRA Paper 78143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    23. Thomas Dietz & Jan Börner & Jan Janosch Förster & Joachim Von Braun, 2018. "Governance of the Bioeconomy: A Global Comparative Study of National Bioeconomy Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    24. Anke Schaffartzik & Helmut Haberl & Thomas Kastner & Dominik Wiedenhofer & Nina Eisenmenger & Karl-Heinz Erb, 2015. "Trading Land: A Review of Approaches to Accounting for Upstream Land Requirements of Traded Products," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 19(5), pages 703-714, October.
    25. Hassan, Shady S. & Williams, Gwilym A. & Jaiswal, Amit K., 2019. "Moving towards the second generation of lignocellulosic biorefineries in the EU: Drivers, challenges, and opportunities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 590-599.
    26. Sleenhoff, Susanne & Landeweerd, Laurens & Osseweijer, Patricia, 2015. "Bio-basing society by including emotions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 78-83.
    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. Genovaitė Liobikienė & Astrida Miceikienė, 2023. "Contribution of the European Bioeconomy Strategy to the Green Deal Policy: Challenges and Opportunities in Implementing These Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Daniela Firoiu & George H. Ionescu & Teodor Marian Cojocaru & Mariana Niculescu & Maria Nache Cimpoeru & Oana Alexandra Călin, 2023. "Progress of EU Member States Regarding the Bioeconomy and Biomass Producing and Converting Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Delia-Elena Diaconașu & Ionel Bostan & Cristina Căutișanu & Irina Chiriac, 2022. "Insights into the Sustainable Development of the Bioeconomy at the European Level, in the Context of the Desired Clean Environment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Emilio Abad-Segura & Ana Batlles-delaFuente & Mariana-Daniela González-Zamar & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña, 2021. "Implications for Sustainability of the Joint Application of Bioeconomy and Circular Economy: A Worldwide Trend Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-24, June.
    5. Umberto Lucia & Giulia Grisolia, 2021. "The Gouy-Stodola Theorem—From Irreversibility to Sustainability—The Thermodynamic Human Development Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-13, April.
    6. Britz, Wolfgang & Li, Jingwen & Shang, Linmei, 2021. "Combining large-scale sensitivity analysis in Computable General Equilibrium models with Machine Learning: An Example Application to policy supporting the bio-economy," Conference papers 333285, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    7. Genovaitė Liobikienė & Ričardas Krikštolaitis & Astrida Miceikienė, 2023. "The main determinants of changes in biomass extraction: the decomposition analysis approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 7987-8003, August.
    8. Miceikienė Astrida & Verulidze Vazha & Kuklierius Mindaugas, 2022. "The Role of Environmental Taxes in Bioeconomy Development: Cases of Lithuania and Georgia," Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development, Sciendo, vol. 44(1), pages 61-71, March.
    9. Durwin H.J. Lynch & Pim Klaassen & Lan van Wassenaer & Jacqueline E.W. Broerse, 2020. "Constructing the Public in Roadmapping the Transition to a Bioeconomy: A Case Study from the Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    10. Maria Kotseva-Tikova & Jaroslav Dvorak, 2021. "The bioeconomiy during a COVID-19 pandemic: the case of Bulgaria and Lithuania," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 4, pages 49-70,71-92.
    11. José V. Matos & Rui J. Lopes, 2021. "Food System Sustainability Metrics: Policies, Quantification, and the Role of Complexity Sciences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-38, November.
    12. Tévécia Ronzon & Susanne Iost & George Philippidis, 2022. "Has the European Union entered a bioeconomy transition? Combining an output-based approach with a shift-share analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 8195-8217, June.
    13. Wen, Lanjiao & Chatalova, Lioudmila, 2021. "Will transaction costs and economies of scale tip the balance in farm size in industrial agriculture? An illustration for non-food biomass production in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(2).
    14. Liobikienė, Genovaitė & Miceikienė, Astrida & Brizga, Janis, 2021. "Decomposition analysis of bioresources: Implementing a competitive and sustainable bioeconomy strategy in the Baltic Sea Region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    15. Lanjiao Wen & Lioudmila Chatalova, 2021. "Will Transaction Costs and Economies of Scale Tip the Balance in Farm Size in Industrial Agriculture? An Illustration for Non-Food Biomass Production in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.

    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. Asada, Raphael & Cardellini, Giuseppe & Mair-Bauernfeind, Claudia & Wenger, Julia & Haas, Verena & Holzer, Daniel & Stern, Tobias, 2020. "Effective bioeconomy? a MRIO-based socioeconomic and environmental impact assessment of generic sectoral innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    2. Wiebke Jander & Sven Wydra & Johann Wackerbauer & Philipp Grundmann & Stephan Piotrowski, 2020. "Monitoring Bioeconomy Transitions with Economic–Environmental and Innovation Indicators: Addressing Data Gaps in the Short Term," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-18, June.
    3. George B. Frisvold & Steven M. Moss & Andrea Hodgson & Mary E. Maxon, 2021. "Understanding the U.S. Bioeconomy: A New Definition and Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    4. Zeug, Walther & Bezama, Alberto & Thrän, Daniela, 2020. "Towards a holistic and integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of the bioeconomy: Background on concepts, visions and measurements," UFZ Discussion Papers 7/2020, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    5. Bruckner, Martin & Fischer, Günther & Tramberend, Sylvia & Giljum, Stefan, 2015. "Measuring telecouplings in the global land system: A review and comparative evaluation of land footprint accounting methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 11-21.
    6. Britz, Wolfgang & Li, Jingwen & Shang, Linmei, 2021. "Combining large-scale sensitivity analysis in Computable General Equilibrium models with Machine Learning: An Example Application to policy supporting the bio-economy," Conference papers 333285, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    7. 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.
    8. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    9. Troxler, David & Zabel, Astrid, 2021. "Clearing forests to make way for a sustainable economy transition in Switzerland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    10. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen, J., 2021. "Integrating the green economy, circular economy and bioeconomy in a strategic sustainability framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    11. Anke Schaffartzik & Dominik Wiedenhofer & Nina Eisenmenger, 2015. "Raw Material Equivalents: The Challenges of Accounting for Sustainability in a Globalized World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-26, April.
    12. Liobikienė, Genovaitė & Miceikienė, Astrida & Brizga, Janis, 2021. "Decomposition analysis of bioresources: Implementing a competitive and sustainable bioeconomy strategy in the Baltic Sea Region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    13. Laibach, Natalie & Börner, Jan & Bröring, Stefanie, 2019. "Exploring the future of the bioeconomy: An expert-based scoping study examining key enabling technology fields with potential to foster the transition toward a bio-based economy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    14. Jörg Schweinle & Natalia Geng & Susanne Iost & Holger Weimar & Dominik Jochem, 2020. "Monitoring Sustainability Effects of the Bioeconomy: A Material Flow Based Approach Using the Example of Softwood Lumber and Its Core Product Epal 1 Pallet," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-27, March.
    15. Sanz-Hernández, Alexia & Jiménez-Caballero, Paula & Zarauz, Irene, 2022. "Gender and women in scientific literature on bioeconomy: A systematic review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    16. Maria Kotseva-Tikova & Jaroslav Dvorak, 2021. "The bioeconomiy during a COVID-19 pandemic: the case of Bulgaria and Lithuania," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 4, pages 49-70,71-92.
    17. O'Brien, Meghan & Bringezu, Stefan, 2018. "European Timber Consumption: Developing a Method to Account for Timber Flows and the EU's Global Forest Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 322-332.
    18. Franz Grossauer & Gernot Stoeglehner, 2020. "Bioeconomy—Spatial Requirements for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-28, March.
    19. Kastner, Thomas & Kastner, Michael & Nonhebel, Sanderine, 2011. "Tracing distant environmental impacts of agricultural products from a consumer perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1032-1040, April.
    20. Eivind Lekve Bjelle & Johannes Többen & Konstantin Stadler & Thomas Kastner & Michaela C. Theurl & Karl-Heinz Erb & Kjartan-Steen Olsen & Kirsten S. Wiebe & Richard Wood, 2020. "Adding country resolution to EXIOBASE: impacts on land use embodied in trade," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 9(1), pages 1-25, December.

    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:lauspo:v:91:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719316655. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.