IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p7746-d592508.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contextualization of the Bioeconomy Concept through Its Links with Related Concepts and the Challenges Facing Humanity

Author

Listed:
  • Leire Barañano

    (NEIKER-Basque Institute of Agricultural Research and Development, Parque Científico y Tecnológico de Bizkaia P812, 48160 Derio, Spain
    Both authors contributed equally to this study.)

  • Naroa Garbisu

    (Faculty of Economics and Business (Sarriko), University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48015 Bilbao, Spain
    Both authors contributed equally to this study.)

  • Itziar Alkorta

    (Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), P.O. Box 644, 48080 Bilbao, Spain)

  • Andrés Araujo

    (Department of Management and Business Economics, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48015 Bilbao, Spain)

  • Carlos Garbisu

    (NEIKER-Basque Institute of Agricultural Research and Development, Parque Científico y Tecnológico de Bizkaia P812, 48160 Derio, Spain)

Abstract

The concept of bioeconomy is a topic of debate, confusion, skepticism, and criticism. Paradoxically, this is not necessarily a negative thing as it is encouraging a fruitful exchange of information, ideas, knowledge, and values, with concomitant beneficial effects on the definition and evolution of the bioeconomy paradigm. At the core of the debate, three points of view coexist: (i) those who support a broad interpretation of the term bioeconomy, through the incorporation of all economic activities based on the production and conversion of renewable biological resources (and organic wastes) into products, including agriculture, livestock, fishing, forestry and similar economic activities that have accompanied humankind for millennia; (ii) those who embrace a much narrower interpretation, reserving the use of the term bioeconomy for new, innovative, and technologically-advanced economic initiatives that result in the generation of high-added-value products and services from the conversion of biological resources; and (iii) those who stand between these two viewpoints. Here, to shed light on this debate, a contextualization of the bioeconomy concept through its links with related concepts (biotechnology, bio-based economy, circular economy, green economy, ecological economics, environmental economics, etc.) and challenges facing humanity today is presented.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7746-:d:592508
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7746/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7746/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rolf Meyer, 2017. "Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-32, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Massimiliano Borrello & Stefano Pascucci & Luigi Cembalo, 2020. "Three Propositions to Unify Circular Economy Research: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-22, May.
    4. Manuel Hafner & Lukas Fehr & Jan Springorum & Artur Petkau & Reinhard Johler, 2020. "Perceptions of Bioeconomy and the Desire for Governmental Action: Regional Actors’ Connotations of Wood-Based Bioeconomy in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-13, November.
    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.
    6. 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.
    7. Anonymous, 2013. "Introduction to the Issue," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 243-243, December.
    8. Venkatachalam, L., 2007. "Environmental economics and ecological economics: Where they can converge?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 550-558, March.
    9. Irwa Issa & Sebastian Delbrück & Ulrich Hamm, 2019. "Bioeconomy from experts’ perspectives – Results of a global expert survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, May.
    10. Mairon G. Bastos Lima, 2021. "Corporate Power in the Bioeconomy Transition: The Policies and Politics of Conservative Ecological Modernization in Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, June.
    11. Anonymous, 2013. "Introduction to the Issue," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 129-130, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Thomas Wiedmann & John Barrett, 2010. "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-49, June.
    14. Clive L. Spash, 2011. "Social Ecological Economics: Understanding the Past to See the Future," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 340-375, April.
    15. James Gaffey & Helena McMahon & Emily Marsh & Kaisa Vehmas & Tiina Kymäläinen & John Vos, 2021. "Understanding Consumer Perspectives of Bio-Based Products—A Comparative Case Study from Ireland and The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, May.
    16. Chiara Bicchielli & Noemi Biancone & Fernando Ferri & Patrizia Grifoni, 2021. "BiOnto: An Ontology for Sustainable Bioeconomy and Bioproducts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, April.
    17. Louise Staffas & Mathias Gustavsson & Kes McCormick, 2013. "Strategies and Policies for the Bioeconomy and Bio-Based Economy: An Analysis of Official National Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Spash, Clive L., 2020. "A tale of three paradigms: Realising the revolutionary potential of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    19. 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.
    20. Vanessa Oltra & Maïder Saint Jean, 2009. "Sectoral systems of environmental innovation: an application to the French automotive industry," Post-Print hal-00274413, HAL.
    21. Wackernagel, Mathis & Onisto, Larry & Bello, Patricia & Callejas Linares, Alejandro & Susana Lopez Falfan, Ina & Mendez Garcia, Jesus & Isabel Suarez Guerrero, Ana & Guadalupe Suarez Guerrero, Ma., 1999. "National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 375-390, June.
    22. Sadhukhan, Jhuma & Martinez-Hernandez, Elias & Murphy, Richard J. & Ng, Denny K.S. & Hassim, Mimi H. & Siew Ng, Kok & Yoke Kin, Wan & Jaye, Ida Fahani Md & Leung Pah Hang, Melissa Y. & Andiappan, Vikn, 2018. "Role of bioenergy, biorefinery and bioeconomy in sustainable development: Strategic pathways for Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 1966-1987.
    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. Yasmin Imparato Maximo & Mariana Hassegawa & Pieter Johannes Verkerk & André Luiz Missio, 2022. "Forest Bioeconomy in Brazil: Potential Innovative Products from the Forest Sector," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-24, August.
    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. 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. 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.
    5. Jon Paul Faulkner & Enda Murphy & Mark Scott, 2024. "Bioeconomy, Planning and Sustainable Development: A Theoretical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-14, September.
    6. Anna Maroušková, 2023. "Food Waste Management via Insect Production in the Perspective of Circular Bioeconomy," Economics Working Papers 2023-02, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Faculty of Economics.

    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. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Franz Grossauer & Gernot Stoeglehner, 2020. "Bioeconomy—Spatial Requirements for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-28, March.
    5. Mauricio Alviar & Andrés García-Suaza & Laura Ramírez-Gómez & Simón Villegas-Velásquez, 2021. "Measuring the Contribution of the Bioeconomy: The Case of Colombia and Antioquia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. Kean Birch, 2016. "Emergent Imaginaries and Fragmented Policy Frameworks in the Canadian Bio-Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    9. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    10. 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).
    11. 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).
    12. Jürges, Nataly, 2016. "Wahrnehmungen und Funktionen in der Transformation zur Bioökonomie: Eine Akteursanalyse im Politikfeld "Boden"," UFZ Discussion Papers 6/2016, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    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. 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.
    15. Lovrić, Nataša & Lovrić, Marko & Mavsar, Robert, 2020. "Factors behind development of innovations in European forest-based bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Stefan Bößner & Francis X. Johnson & Zoha Shawoo, 2020. "Governing the Bioeconomy: What Role for International Institutions?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, December.
    18. 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.
    19. Valeria Ferreira Gregorio & Laia Pié & Antonio Terceño, 2018. "A Systematic Literature Review of Bio, Green and Circular Economy Trends in Publications in the Field of Economics and Business Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-39, November.
    20. Rolf Meyer, 2017. "Bioeconomy Strategies: Contexts, Visions, Guiding Implementation Principles and Resulting Debates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-32, June.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7746-:d:592508. 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.