IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5481-d807751.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global Inequalities in the Bioeconomy: Thinking Continuity and Change in View of the Global Soy Complex

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Backhouse

    (BMBF-Junior Research Group “Bioeconomy and Inequalities”, Institute of Sociology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Bachstr. 18k, 07743 Jena, Germany)

  • Malte Lühmann

    (BMBF-Junior Research Group “Bioeconomy and Inequalities”, Institute of Sociology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Bachstr. 18k, 07743 Jena, Germany)

  • Anne Tittor

    (BMBF-Junior Research Group “Bioeconomy and Inequalities”, Institute of Sociology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Bachstr. 18k, 07743 Jena, Germany)

Abstract

As a proposed pathway to societal transformation, the bioeconomy is aimed at providing a sustainable alternative to the fossil-based economy, replacing fossil raw materials with renewable biogenic alternatives. In this conceptual contribution, we argue that it is impossible to transform societies into sustainable bioeconomies considering the narrow boundaries of the bioeconomy as a policy. Drawing on approaches including agro-food studies, cheap food, and agrarian extractivism, we show that the bioeconomy is entangled in a broader context of social relations which call its claim to sustainability into question. Our analysis of the global soy complex, which represents the core of the current agro-food system, demonstrates how the bioeconomy perpetuates global inequalities with regard to trade relations, demand, and supply patterns, as well as power relations between the involved actors from the global to the local level. Against this background, we propose a fundamental rethink of the underlying understanding of transformation in bioeconomy policies. Instead of thinking the bioeconomy only along the lines of ecological modernisation, its proponents should consider studies on social-ecological transformation, which would entail radical structural change of the prevailing food regime to cope with the social-ecological crisis.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Backhouse & Malte Lühmann & Anne Tittor, 2022. "Global Inequalities in the Bioeconomy: Thinking Continuity and Change in View of the Global Soy Complex," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-15, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5481-:d:807751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5481/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5481/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Idiano D’Adamo & Claudio Sassanelli, 2022. "Biomethane Community: A Research Agenda towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, April.
    3. McKay, Ben M., 2017. "Agrarian Extractivism in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 199-211.
    4. Christoph Görg & Ulrich Brand & Helmut Haberl & Diana Hummel & Thomas Jahn & Stefan Liehr, 2017. "Challenges for Social-Ecological Transformations: Contributions from Social and Political Ecology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, June.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    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. Mijailoff, Julián Daniel & Burns, Sarah Lilian, 2023. "Fixing the meaning of floating signifier: Discourses and network analysis in the bioeconomy policy processes in Argentina and Uruguay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    2. Zuberi, Mehwish & Spies, Michael & Nielsen, Jonas Ø., 2024. "Is there a future for smallholder farmers in bioeconomy? The case of ‘improved’ seeds in South Punjab, Pakistan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    3. Ollinaho, Ossi I. & Kröger, Markus, 2023. "Separating the two faces of “bioeconomy”: Plantation economy and sociobiodiverse economy in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).

    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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    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. Mechthild Donner & Hugo de Vries, 2023. "Innovative business models for a sustainable circular bioeconomy in the french agrifood domain," Post-Print hal-04047682, HAL.
    6. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Juha Peltomaa, 2018. "Drumming the Barrels of Hope? Bioeconomy Narratives in the Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    10. 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.
    11. Liesbeth de Schutter & Stefan Giljum & Tiina Häyhä & Martin Bruckner & Asjad Naqvi & Ines Omann & Sigrid Stagl, 2019. "Bioeconomy Transitions through the Lens of Coupled Social-Ecological Systems: A Framework for Place-Based Responsibility in the Global Resource System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-23, October.
    12. Mechthild Donner & Hugo de Vries, 2023. "Innovative Business Models for a Sustainable Circular Bioeconomy in the French Agrifood Domain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-29, March.
    13. Carmen Priefer & Rolf Meyer, 2019. "One Concept, Many Opinions: How Scientists in Germany Think About the Concept of Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, August.
    14. 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).
    15. 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.
    16. Jochen Dürr & Marcelo Sili, 2022. "New or Traditional Approaches in Argentina’s Bioeconomy? Biomass and Biotechnology Use, Local Embeddedness, and Sustainability Outcomes of Bioeconomic Ventures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-28, November.
    17. 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).
    18. Stefan Liehr & Julia Röhrig & Marion Mehring & Thomas Kluge, 2017. "How the Social-Ecological Systems Concept Can Guide Transdisciplinary Research and Implementation: Addressing Water Challenges in Central Northern Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Idiano D'Adamo & Massimo Gastaldi & Ilhan Ozturk, 2023. "The sustainable development of mobility in the green transition: Renewable energy, local industrial chain, and battery recycling," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 840-852, April.
    20. Sarah Jansen & William Foster & Gustavo Anríquez & Jorge Ortega, 2021. "Understanding Farm-Level Incentives within the Bioeconomy Framework: Prices, Product Quality, Losses, and Bio-Based Alternatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, January.

    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:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5481-:d:807751. 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.