IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i11p2001-d966921.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unlocking Romania’s Forest-Based Bioeconomy Potential: Knowledge-Action-Gaps and the Way Forward

Author

Listed:
  • Alexandru Giurca

    (Heidelberg Center for the Environment (HCE), Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.1, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany)

  • Liviu Nichiforel

    (Faculty of Forestry, Stefan cel Mare University, Universitatii Streat 13, 720229 Suceava, Romania)

  • Petru Tudor Stăncioiu

    (Department of Silviculture, Faculty of Silviculture and Forest Engineering, Transilvania University of Brasov, Sirul Beethoven 1, 500123 Brasov, Romania)

  • Marian Drăgoi

    (Faculty of Forestry, Stefan cel Mare University, Universitatii Streat 13, 720229 Suceava, Romania)

  • Daniel-Paul Dima

    (Porini Log Oy., Kyösti Kallion tie 4 A8, 00570 Helsinki, Finland)

Abstract

As national governments continue developing bioeconomy strategies, the forest-based sector becomes increasingly important. Romania’s forest sector can be at the heart of a sustainable circular-bioeconomy transition. However, despite recently launching its national forest strategy, the country has yet to produce a comprehensive bioeconomy strategy where the forest sector is properly acknowledged and integrated. Here, we discuss the potential opportunities and challenges for developing a national circular–bioeconomy strategy that builds around the forest-based sector. Methodologically, we build on qualitative insights from two foresight workshops conducted with 16 international experts. Conceptually, we draw on recent forest-based circular-bioeconomy literature, which we synthesize and use to complement the insights provided by workshop participants. Three main key findings emerged from this analysis: (i) Several knowledge gaps related to biomass availability, carbon storage, biodiversity status, ecosystem services, or governance arrangements persist. (ii) A circular forest bioeconomy must focus on regional and rural development, including both traditional wood use, as well as new wood-based products. Finally, (iii) the transition to a forest-based bioeconomy requires substantial investments in areas such as forest infrastructure, education, and labor force. Forward-looking policies can address these challenges by fostering new ways of thinking, collaborating and researching the bioeconomy. We anticipate our article to be a starting point for more informed discussions around the role of forests and the forest-based sector in Romania’s future bioeconomy strategy. Furthermore, as work around the implementation of the national forest strategy has recently commenced, the ideas discussed here could help decision-makers better integrate and coordinate national and European forest policies with bioeconomy ambitions.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexandru Giurca & Liviu Nichiforel & Petru Tudor Stăncioiu & Marian Drăgoi & Daniel-Paul Dima, 2022. "Unlocking Romania’s Forest-Based Bioeconomy Potential: Knowledge-Action-Gaps and the Way Forward," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:11:p:2001-:d:966921
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/11/2001/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/11/2001/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schwarzbauer, Peter & Weinfurter, Stefan & Stern, Tobias & Koch, Sebastian, 2013. "Economic crises: Impacts on the forest-based sector and wood-based energy use in Austria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 13-22.
    2. 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.
    3. Nina Hagemann & Erik Gawel & Alexandra Purkus & Nadine Pannicke & Jennifer Hauck, 2016. "Possible Futures towards a Wood-Based Bioeconomy: A Scenario Analysis for Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    4. Kean Birch & Les Levidow & Theo Papaioannou, 2010. "Sustainable Capital ? The Neoliberalization of Nature and Knowledge in the European “Knowledge-based Bio-economy”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(9), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Markard, Jochen & Stadelmann, Martin & Truffer, Bernhard, 2009. "Prospective analysis of technological innovation systems: Identifying technological and organizational development options for biogas in Switzerland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 655-667, May.
    6. Urmetzer, Sophie & Lask, Jan & Vargas-Carpintero, Ricardo & Pyka, Andreas, 2020. "Learning to change: Transformative knowledge for building a sustainable bioeconomy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Scriban, Ramona Elena & Nichiforel, Liviu & Bouriaud, Laura Gianina & Barnoaiea, Ionut & Cosofret, Vasile Cosmin & Barbu, Catalina Oana, 2019. "Governance of the forest restitution process in Romania: An application of the DPSIR model," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 59-67.
    8. Hurmekoski, Elias & Lovrić, Marko & Lovrić, Nataša & Hetemäki, Lauri & Winkel, Georg, 2019. "Frontiers of the forest-based bioeconomy – A European Delphi study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 86-99.
    9. Peter J. Ince & Andrew Kramp & Kenneth E. Skog, 2012. "Evaluating Economic Impacts of Expanded Global Wood Energy Consumption with the USFPM/GFPM Model," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 60(2), pages 211-237, June.
    10. Nichiforel, Liviu & Deuffic, Philippe & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark & Weiss, Gerhard & Hujala, Teppo & Keary, Kevin & Lawrence, Anna & Avdibegović, Mersudin & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Feliciano, Diana & Górriz-, 2020. "Two decades of forest-related legislation changes in European countries analysed from a property rights perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    11. Hurmekoski, Elias & Hetemäki, Lauri, 2013. "Studying the future of the forest sector: Review and implications for long-term outlook studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 17-29.
    12. 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.
    13. Daniel Hausknost & Ernst Schriefl & Christian Lauk & Gerald Kalt, 2017. "A Transition to Which Bioeconomy? An Exploration of Diverging Techno-Political Choices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, April.
    14. 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.
    15. Marian Drăgoi & Veronica Toza, 2019. "Did Forestland Restitution Facilitate Institutional Amnesia? Some Evidence from Romanian Forest Policy," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-19, June.
    16. Manfred Kircher, 2019. "Bioeconomy: Markets, Implications, and Investment Opportunities," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-36, 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. Gerhard Weiss & Alice Ludvig & Ivana Živojinović, 2023. "Embracing the Non-Wood Forest Products Potential for Bioeconomy—Analysis of Innovation Cases across Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, 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. Sotiropoulou, Irene & Deutz, Pauline, 2021. "Understanding the bioeconomy: a new sustainability economy in British and European public discourse," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 10(4), December.
    2. Leire Barañano & Olatz Unamunzaga & Naroa Garbisu & Siebe Briers & Timokleia Orfanidou & Blasius Schmid & Inazio Martínez de Arano & Andrés Araujo & Carlos Garbisu, 2022. "Assessment of the Development of Forest-Based Bioeconomy in European Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    4. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    5. Hurmekoski, Elias & Lovrić, Marko & Lovrić, Nataša & Hetemäki, Lauri & Winkel, Georg, 2019. "Frontiers of the forest-based bioeconomy – A European Delphi study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 86-99.
    6. Giurca, Alexandru & Befort, Nicolas, 2023. "Deconstructing substitution narratives: The case of bioeconomy innovations from the forest-based sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    7. Franz Grossauer & Gernot Stoeglehner, 2023. "Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Spatial Aspects and a Call for a New Research Agenda," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, January.
    8. Andra-Cosmina Albulescu & Michael Manton & Daniela Larion & Per Angelstam, 2022. "The Winding Road towards Sustainable Forest Management in Romania, 1989–2022: A Case Study of Post-Communist Social–Ecological Transition," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-29, July.
    9. Ayrapetyan, David & Hermans, Frans, 2020. "Introducing a multiscalar framework for biocluster research: A meta-analysis," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(9).
    10. 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).
    11. Wolfgang Onyeali & Michael P. Schlaile & Bastian Winkler, 2023. "Navigating the Biocosmos: Cornerstones of a Bioeconomic Utopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-32, June.
    12. 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.
    13. 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).
    14. 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.
    15. Maja Farstad & Pia Piroschka Otte & Erika Palmer, 2024. "Socio-cultural conditions for social acceptance of bioeconomy transitions: the case of Norway," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(7), pages 18559-18574, July.
    16. Hetemäki, L. & D'Amato, D. & Giurca, A. & Hurmekoski, E., 2024. "Synergies and trade-offs in the European forest bioeconomy research: State of the art and the way forward," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    17. Daniel Hausknost & Ernst Schriefl & Christian Lauk & Gerald Kalt, 2017. "A Transition to Which Bioeconomy? An Exploration of Diverging Techno-Political Choices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22, April.
    18. Andrew M. Neill & Cathal O’Donoghue & Jane C. Stout, 2020. "A Natural Capital Lens for a Sustainable Bioeconomy: Determining the Unrealised and Unrecognised Services from Nature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-24, September.
    19. Leire Barañano & Naroa Garbisu & Itziar Alkorta & Andrés Araujo & Carlos Garbisu, 2021. "Contextualization of the Bioeconomy Concept through Its Links with Related Concepts and the Challenges Facing Humanity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-18, July.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:11:p:2001-:d:966921. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.