IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v10y2021i10p95-d641176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Addressing Stakeholder Concerns Regarding the Effective Use of Bio-Based and Biodegradable Plastics

Author

Listed:
  • Carly A. Fletcher

    (Faculty of Science and Engineering, Manchester Metropolitan University, Chester Street, Manchester M1 5GD, UK)

  • Karolina Niemenoja

    (Prospex Institute, Victor Oudart Str. 7, 1030 Brussels, Belgium)

  • Rhiannon Hunt

    (Faculty of Science and Engineering, Manchester Metropolitan University, Chester Street, Manchester M1 5GD, UK)

  • Jill Adams

    (Prospex Institute, Victor Oudart Str. 7, 1030 Brussels, Belgium)

  • Alan Dempsey

    (Faculty of Science and Engineering, Manchester Metropolitan University, Chester Street, Manchester M1 5GD, UK)

  • Craig E. Banks

    (Faculty of Science and Engineering, Manchester Metropolitan University, Chester Street, Manchester M1 5GD, UK)

Abstract

Bio-based and biodegradable materials have the potential to replace traditional petroleum-based plastics across a range of products and contribute to a more circular economy. However, the uptake of these materials will not succeed unless consumers, manufacturers, and regulators are convinced of their efficacy. Investigating performance and safety concerns put forward by academic and non-academic communities, this paper assesses whether these concerns are being adequately addressed by current policy and regulation. In addition, measures to overcome significant concerns are developed through a series of stakeholder engagement events, informed by the Prospex-CQI-and STIR methodology. Discussions across the stakeholder engagement events have highlighted several concerns that create barriers to market up-take of bio-based and biodegradable plastic products, including the continued confusion regarding terminology and resultant communication, difficulties in navigating the plethora of documents related to safety, the appropriateness of safety documents when applied to new products, and the overall suitability and sustainability of such materials as an alternative to traditional plastics. To overcome these concerns, a series of recommendations for research, policy, and practice are made with respect to the following key areas of concern: regulation and legislative instruments, material quality and performance, market penetration and availability, waste management infrastructure, sourcing and supply chain, communication and information provision, and material health and safety.

Suggested Citation

  • Carly A. Fletcher & Karolina Niemenoja & Rhiannon Hunt & Jill Adams & Alan Dempsey & Craig E. Banks, 2021. "Addressing Stakeholder Concerns Regarding the Effective Use of Bio-Based and Biodegradable Plastics," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-24, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:10:y:2021:i:10:p:95-:d:641176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/10/10/95/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/10/10/95/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Marc Gramberger & Katharina Zellmer & Kasper Kok & Marc Metzger, 2015. "Stakeholder integrated research (STIR): a new approach tested in climate change adaptation research," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 201-214, February.
    3. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Enrica Imbert, 2018. "Social Life Cycle Approach as a Tool for Promoting the Market Uptake of Bio-Based Products from a Consumer Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-22, March.
    4. Katia Berti & Rod Falvey, 2018. "Does trade weaken product standards?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 852-868, September.
    5. 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.
    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. M. Lahandi Baskoro & Benny Tjahjono & Macarena Beltran & Anna Bogush & Yichuan Wang, 2024. "The imperative of communication signals in boosting business strategies of the bioplastic packaging industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 307-334, February.

    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. Alberto Bezama & Carlo Ingrao & Sinéad O’Keeffe & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Resources, Collaborators, and Neighbors: The Three-Pronged Challenge in the Implementation of Bioeconomy Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    2. Marios Trigkas & Glykeria Karagouni, 2023. "State/Academia Key Stakeholders’ Perceptions Regarding Bioeconomy: Evidence from Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-14, June.
    3. Maria Lourdes Ordoñez Olivo & Zoltán Lakner, 2023. "Shaping the Knowledge Base of Bioeconomy Sectors Development in Latin American and Caribbean Countries: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Edgardo Sica, 2019. "Assessing the Opportunities and Challenges of Green Finance in Italy: An Analysis of the Biomass Production Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, January.
    5. 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).
    6. Maria Backhouse & Kristina Lorenzen, 2021. "Knowledge Production and Land Relations in the Bioeconomy. A Case Study on the Brazilian Sugar-Bioenergy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, April.
    7. Simone Wurster & Cristina Fróes de Borja Reis, 2022. "Priority Products for Sustainability Information and Recommendation Software: Insights in the Context of the EU’s Action Plan Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-28, September.
    8. P. J. Stephenson & Anca Damerell, 2022. "Bioeconomy and Circular Economy Approaches Need to Enhance the Focus on Biodiversity to Achieve Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, August.
    9. Piergiuseppe Morone, 2018. "Sustainability Transition towards a Biobased Economy: Defining, Measuring and Assessing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-6, July.
    10. Hannah Karlewski & Annekatrin Lehmann & Klaus Ruhland & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2019. "A Practical Approach for Social Life Cycle Assessment in the Automotive Industry," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-60, August.
    11. 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.
    12. Ozgul Calicioglu & Alessandro Flammini & Stefania Bracco & Lorenzo Bellù & Ralph Sims, 2019. "The Future Challenges of Food and Agriculture: An Integrated Analysis of Trends and Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, January.
    13. Tina Highfill & Matthew Chambers, 2023. "Developing a National Measure of the Economic Contributions of the Bioeconomy," BEA Working Papers 0206, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
    14. Stefano Bertacchi & Stefania Pagliari & Chiara Cantù & Ilaria Bruni & Massimo Labra & Paola Branduardi, 2021. "Enzymatic Hydrolysate of Cinnamon Waste Material as Feedstock for the Microbial Production of Carotenoids," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-12, January.
    15. Padi, Richard Kingsley & Douglas, Sean & Murphy, Fionnuala, 2023. "Techno-economic potentials of integrating decentralised biomethane production systems into existing natural gas grids," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 283(C).
    16. Maximilian Kardung & Kutay Cingiz & Ortwin Costenoble & Roel Delahaye & Wim Heijman & Marko Lovrić & Myrna van Leeuwen & Robert M’Barek & Hans van Meijl & Stephan Piotrowski & Tévécia Ronzon & Johanne, 2021. "Development of the Circular Bioeconomy: Drivers and Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, January.
    17. Duckett, Dominic George & McKee, Annie J. & Sutherland, Lee-Ann & Kyle, Carol & Boden, Lisa A. & Auty, Harriet & Bessell, Paul R. & McKendrick, Iain J., 2017. "Scenario planning as communicative action: Lessons from participatory exercises conducted for the Scottish livestock industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 138-151.
    18. Nils Thonemann & Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga, 2020. "How to Conduct Prospective Life Cycle Assessment for Emerging Technologies? A Systematic Review and Methodological Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    19. Annie Dimitrova & Atanas Pavlov, 2024. "Animal and Vegetal Waste Generated by EU Member States in the Period 2016 – 2020," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 241-256.
    20. Xun Wei & Jie Luo & Aqing Pu & Qianqian Liu & Lei Zhang & Suowei Wu & Yan Long & Yan Leng & Zhenying Dong & Xiangyuan Wan, 2022. "From Biotechnology to Bioeconomy: A Review of Development Dynamics and Pathways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-17, August.

    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:jresou:v:10:y:2021:i:10:p:95-:d:641176. 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.