IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i9p1555-d913435.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of the Social Licence to Operate in the Emerging Bioeconomy—A Case Study of Short-Rotation Coppice Poplar in Slovakia

Author

Listed:
  • Christine Pichler

    (Wood K Plus—Competence Centre for Wood Composites and Wood Chemistry, Kompetenzzentrum Holz GmbH, Altenberger Straße 69, 4040 Linz, Austria)

  • Daniela Fürtner

    (Institute of Marketing and Innovation, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Feistmantelstraße 4, 1180 Vienna, Austria)

  • Franziska Hesser

    (Wood K Plus—Competence Centre for Wood Composites and Wood Chemistry, Kompetenzzentrum Holz GmbH, Altenberger Straße 69, 4040 Linz, Austria)

  • Peter Schwarzbauer

    (Institute of Marketing and Innovation, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Feistmantelstraße 4, 1180 Vienna, Austria)

  • Lea Maria Ranacher

    (Wood K Plus—Competence Centre for Wood Composites and Wood Chemistry, Kompetenzzentrum Holz GmbH, Altenberger Straße 69, 4040 Linz, Austria)

Abstract

Wood plays a key role in the endeavours of the EU to establish a circular bioeconomy based on renewable biological resources. Today, forestry on its own cannot sustainably satisfy the demand for woody biomass. Short-Rotation Coppice (SRC) represents a possible alternative production system where fast-growing tree species are cultivated on agricultural land. Thus far, lacking engagement from farmers and public opposition against other bioenergy projects have hindered the expansion of SRC. At the same time, society does not consider wood unconditionally sustainable anymore. The Social License to Operate (SLO) describes the dynamic relationship between industries, their communities, and other stakeholders. The present study adapted a quantitative SLO model based on integrative socio-psychological relationship modelling and applied it to a case study in Slovakia. The roles of trust, fairness, impact assessment, and governance hold for the establishment of social acceptance were analysed with Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). The model revealed the perception of individual benefits as the strongest predictor for social acceptance. The average level of social acceptance was found to be between “Acceptance” and “Approval”. The results thus show that SRC currently must not face societal pressure in Slovakia. However, the SLO is not static and must be constantly re-evaluated.

Suggested Citation

  • Christine Pichler & Daniela Fürtner & Franziska Hesser & Peter Schwarzbauer & Lea Maria Ranacher, 2022. "The Role of the Social Licence to Operate in the Emerging Bioeconomy—A Case Study of Short-Rotation Coppice Poplar in Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:9:p:1555-:d:913435
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/9/1555/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/9/1555/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shaofu Du & Lin Wei & Yangguang Zhu & Tengfei Nie, 2018. "Peer-regarding fairness in supply chain," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(10), pages 3384-3396, May.
    2. Verena Bitzer & Pieter Glasbergen & Bas Arts, 2013. "Exploring the potential of intersectoral partnerships to improve the position of farmers in global agrifood chains: findings from the coffee sector in Peru," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(1), pages 5-20, March.
    3. Convery, I. & Robson, D. & Ottitsch, A. & Long, M., 2012. "The willingness of farmers to engage with bioenergy and woody biomass production: A regional case study from Cumbria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 293-300.
    4. Busch, Gesa & Spiller, Achim, 2016. "Farmer share and fair distribution in food chains from a consumer’s perspective," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 149-158.
    5. Hauk, Sebastian & Knoke, Thomas & Wittkopf, Stefan, 2014. "Economic evaluation of short rotation coppice systems for energy from biomass—A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 435-448.
    6. Axel Haller & Chris J. van Staden & Cristina Landis, 2018. "Value Added as part of Sustainability Reporting: Reporting on Distributional Fairness or Obfuscation?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 763-781, October.
    7. Gounaris, Spiros P., 2005. "Trust and commitment influences on customer retention: insights from business-to-business services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 126-140, February.
    8. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    9. Busse, Maria & Siebert, Rosemarie, 2018. "Acceptance studies in the field of land use—A critical and systematic review to advance the conceptualization of acceptance and acceptability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 235-245.
    10. Nenad Šimunović & Franziska Hesser & Tobias Stern, 2018. "Frame Analysis of ENGO Conceptualization of Sustainable Forest Management: Environmental Justice and Neoliberalism at the Core of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    11. Humphreys, David, 2000. "A business perspective on community relations in mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 127-131, September.
    12. Thorpe, Jodie, 2018. "Procedural Justice in Value Chains Through Public–private Partnerships," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 162-175.
    13. Howlett, Michael & Rayner, Jeremy, 2006. "Convergence and Divergence in ‘New Governance’ Arrangements: Evidence from European Integrated Natural Resource Strategies," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 167-189, August.
    14. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    15. Moffat, Kieren & Zhang, Airong, 2014. "The paths to social licence to operate: An integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 61-70.
    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. Antoine Boche & Clément Foucher & Luiz Fernando Lavado Villa, 2022. "Understanding Microgrid Sustainability: A Systemic and Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    2. Bonaiuto, M. & Mosca, O. & Milani, A. & Ariccio, S. & Dessi, F. & Fornara, F., 2024. "Beliefs about technological and contextual features drive biofuels’ social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    3. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    4. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    5. Thorpe, Jodie, 2018. "Procedural Justice in Value Chains Through Public–private Partnerships," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 162-175.
    6. António Mateus & Luís Martins, 2021. "Building a mineral-based value chain in Europe: the balance between social acceptance and secure supply," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(2), pages 239-261, July.
    7. Walsh, Bríd & van der Plank, Sien & Behrens, Paul, 2017. "The effect of community consultation on perceptions of a proposed mine: A case study from southeast Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 163-171.
    8. Stuart, Alice & Bond, Alan & Franco, Aldina M.A. & Baker, Julia & Gerrard, Chris & Danino, Vittoria & Jones, Kylie, 2023. "Conceptualising social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    9. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    10. Anas Zyadin & Karthikeyan Natarajan & Suresh Chauhan & Harminder Singh & Md. Kamrul Hassan & Ari Pappinen & Paavo Pelkonen, 2015. "Indian Farmers’ Perceptions and Willingness to Supply Surplus Biomass to an Envisioned Biomass-Based Power Plant," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13, April.
    11. John Colton & Kenneth Corscadden & Stewart Fast & Monica Gattinger & Joel Gehman & Martha Hall Findlay & Dylan Morgan & Judith Sayers & Jennifer Winter & Adonis Yatchew, 2016. "Energy Projects, Social Licence, Public Acceptance and Regulatory Systems in Canada: A White Paper," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(20), May.
    12. Baumber, Alex & Scerri, Moira & Schweinsberg, Stephen, 2019. "A social licence for the sharing economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 12-23.
    13. Heffron, Raphael J. & Downes, Lauren & Ramirez Rodriguez, Oscar M. & McCauley, Darren, 2021. "The emergence of the ‘social licence to operate’ in the extractive industries?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    14. Brueckner, Martin & Eabrasu, Marian, 2018. "Pinning down the social license to operate (SLO): The problem of normative complexity," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 217-226.
    15. Lacey, Justine & Carr-Cornish, Simone & Zhang, Airong & Eglinton, Kelvyn & Moffat, Kieren, 2017. "The art and science of community relations: Procedural fairness at Newmont's Waihi Gold operations, New Zealand," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 245-254.
    16. Arjan Kirkels & Vince Evers & Gerrit Muller, 2021. "Systems Engineering for the Energy Transition: Potential Contributions and Limitations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-13, May.
    17. Badera Jarosław, 2014. "Problems of the social non-acceptance of mining projects with particular emphasis on the European Union – a literature review," Environmental & Socio-economic Studies, Sciendo, vol. 2(1), pages 27-34, March.
    18. Maria Busse & Nico Heitepriem & Rosemarie Siebert, 2019. "The Acceptability of Land Pools for the Sustainable Revalorisation of Wetland Meadows in the Spreewald Region, Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-18, July.
    19. Balza, Lenin H. & Diaz, Lina M. & Gomez-Parra, Nicolas & Manzano M., Osmel E., 2023. "The unwritten license: The societal SLO in Latin America’s extractive sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    20. Cohen, Adi & Fischhendler, Itay & Katz, David, 2023. "Institutional acceptance of wildlife mitigation technologies for wind energy: The case of Israel," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    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:9:p:1555-:d:913435. 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.