IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i23p10370-d1530581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Critical Analysis of the Dynamics of Stakeholders for Bioeconomy Innovation: The Case of Caldas, Colombia

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos Humberto González Escobar

    (Sustainable Development and Environment Research Center CIMAD, The University of Manizales, Manizales 170001, Colombia)

  • Juan Carlos Granobles Torres

    (Sustainable Development and Environment Research Center CIMAD, The University of Manizales, Manizales 170001, Colombia)

  • Abel Osvaldo Villa Rodríguez

    (Sustainable Development and Environment Research Center CIMAD, The University of Manizales, Manizales 170001, Colombia)

Abstract

Stakeholders and their dynamics are often neglected in innovation system literature. The importance of the bioeconomy is growing due to its implications for addressing environmental challenges, shaping economic decisions, markets, and sustainable development. This paper analyses stakeholders’ dynamics for knowledge creation and innovation to transit from unsustainable practices to the sustainable use of biological resources—the bioeconomy. The originality of this paper is the creation of an analytical framework to characterise the interactions of stakeholders and how these interactions reshape innovation systems to create a new narrative and knowledge-base platform for innovation. Using a qualitative approach, data were collected through surveys between 2022 and 2024. We explored the dynamics of 29 stakeholders involved and collaborating in R&D activities from the biotechnology sector in Caldas, Colombia. Our findings show that dynamics towards the bioeconomy are occurring only at the discursive level. Stakeholders carry out research activities to generate income rather than for innovative purposes, overlooking informal interactions that create novel ideas that could translate into solutions, services, and products. We conclude that the bioeconomy transition needs a systemic disequilibrium with a new institutional infrastructure that enables stakeholders, including civil society, to create a structural change for embracing innovation dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos Humberto González Escobar & Juan Carlos Granobles Torres & Abel Osvaldo Villa Rodríguez, 2024. "A Critical Analysis of the Dynamics of Stakeholders for Bioeconomy Innovation: The Case of Caldas, Colombia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10370-:d:1530581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10370/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10370/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Kern, Florian & Smith, Adrian, 2008. "Restructuring energy systems for sustainability? Energy transition policy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4093-4103, November.
    3. Purkus, Alexandra & Lüdtke, Jan, 2020. "A systemic evaluation framework for a multi-actor, forest-based bioeconomy governance process: The German Charter for Wood 2.0 as a case study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Huguenin, Ariane & Jeannerat, Hugues, 2017. "Creating change through pilot and demonstration projects: Towards a valuation policy approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 624-635.
    5. Wilde, Kerstin & Hermans, Frans, 2021. "Innovation in the bioeconomy: Perspectives of entrepreneurs on relevant framework conditions," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 314.
    6. James A. Cunningham & Paul O’Reilly, 2018. "Macro, meso and micro perspectives of technology transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 545-557, June.
    7. Thomas Dietz & Jan Börner & Jan Janosch Förster & Joachim Von Braun, 2018. "Governance of the Bioeconomy: A Global Comparative Study of National Bioeconomy Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    8. Alejandro Balanzó Guzmán & Juan Pablo Centeno & Claudia Marcela Pinzón Rojas & Héctor Heraldo Rojas Jiménez, 2023. "Is bioeconomic potential shared? An assessment of policy expectations at the regional level in Colombia," Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 275-300, May.
    9. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    10. Giampietro, Mario, 2019. "On the Circular Bioeconomy and Decoupling: Implications for Sustainable Growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 143-156.
    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. Giurca, Alexandru & Befort, Nicolas, 2023. "Deconstructing substitution narratives: The case of bioeconomy innovations from the forest-based sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    2. Frank, Alejandro Germán & Gerstlberger, Wolfgang & Paslauski, Carolline Amaral & Lerman, Laura Visintainer & Ayala, Néstor Fabián, 2018. "The contribution of innovation policy criteria to the development of local renewable energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 353-365.
    3. 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).
    4. Sven Wydra, 2019. "Value Chains for Industrial Biotechnology in the Bioeconomy-Innovation System Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, April.
    5. 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.
    6. Lühmann, Malte & Vogelpohl, Thomas, 2023. "The bioeconomy in Germany: A failing political project?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    7. Ben Zhang & Lei Ma & Zheng Liu, 2020. "Literature Trend Identification of Sustainable Technology Innovation: A Bibliometric Study Based on Co-Citation and Main Path Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-20, October.
    8. 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.
    9. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    10. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    11. Stefanie Linser & Markus Lier, 2020. "The Contribution of Sustainable Development Goals and Forest-Related Indicators to National Bioeconomy Progress Monitoring," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    12. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen-Kurki, K. & Lyytikainen, V. & Matthies, B.D. & Horcea-Milcu, A-I., 2022. "Circular bioeconomy: Actors and dynamics of knowledge co-production in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Francisco Chicombo, Adélia Filosa & Musango, Josephine Kaviti, 2022. "Towards a theoretical framework for gendered energy transition at the urban household level: A case of Mozambique," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    15. Rizzi, Francesco & van Eck, Nees Jan & Frey, Marco, 2014. "The production of scientific knowledge on renewable energies: Worldwide trends, dynamics and challenges and implications for management," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 657-671.
    16. Jochen Markard & Marco Suter & Karin Ingold, 2015. "Socio-technical transitions and policy change - Advocacy coalitions in Swiss energy policy," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-13, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    17. 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.
    18. Wilde, Kerstin & Hermans, Frans, 2024. "Transition towards a bioeconomy: Comparison of conditions and institutional work in selected industries," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 50, pages 1-1.
    19. D'Amato, D. & Korhonen, J., 2021. "Integrating the green economy, circular economy and bioeconomy in a strategic sustainability framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    20. Norouzi, F. & Hoppe, T. & Kamp, L.M. & Manktelow, C. & Bauer, P., 2023. "Diagnosis of the implementation of smart grid innovation in The Netherlands and corrective actions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 175(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:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10370-:d:1530581. 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.