IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i2p524-d1314742.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digitalization Risks in the Bioeconomy: An Enterprise-Level Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Sandija Zeverte-Rivza

    (Institute of Economics and Finance, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, 2 Liela Street, LV-3001 Jelgava, Latvia
    Research Department, Celteh Ltd., Purviņi, Naudites pag., Dobeles dstr., LV-3701 Dobele, Latvia)

  • Ieva Brence

    (Division of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Latvian Academy of Sciences, LV-1050 Riga, Latvia
    Department of Tourism and Hospitality, Turiba University, LV-1058, Riga, Latvia)

  • Ina Gudele

    (Research Department, Celteh Ltd., Purviņi, Naudites pag., Dobeles dstr., LV-3701 Dobele, Latvia
    Faculty of Science and Engineering, Liepaja University, LV-3401 Liepaja, Latvia)

  • Baiba Rivza

    (Institute of Economics and Finance, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, 2 Liela Street, LV-3001 Jelgava, Latvia)

  • Peteris Rivza

    (Institute of Computer Systems and Data Science, Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, 2 Liela Street, LV-3001 Jelgava, Latvia)

Abstract

The swift adoption of digitalization and transformation within enterprises and their operations had commenced prior to the onset of COVID-19, characterized by the shift towards Industry 4.0 and subsequently progressing towards Industry 5.0. However, mandated restrictions significantly amplified the necessity and drive to utilize digital tools for both businesses and consumers. New opportunities previously not utilized have arisen yet are hand in hand with several risks linked to the use of these new digital tools. The bioeconomy sector is not an exception. The study aims to consider the sector representatives’ opinions on the significance of the risks related to digitalization. The empirical results of this study stem from a survey of enterprises in the bioeconomy sector carried out in 2020 and 2021 in Latvia. The research results prove that there are many factors influencing the development of digitalization. The results notably affirm that both entrepreneurs and employees in SMEs recognize the considerable importance of these risks, particularly emphasizing the significance of security and technology risks. While the Chi-Square Test of Independence indicates a notable association between risk evaluation scores and the education level of respondents before the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, this association diminishes in 2021. Contrary to the hypothesis that individuals with higher education levels are more attentive to risks, the evidence shows inconsistency in their perception, particularly regarding professional challenges of the entrepreneur and employees to use digital tools and other risk categories. However, the relationship between higher education levels and the significance of risks pertaining to security risks, technology risks, and the skills of the clients to use digital tools is partly affirmed.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandija Zeverte-Rivza & Ieva Brence & Ina Gudele & Baiba Rivza & Peteris Rivza, 2024. "Digitalization Risks in the Bioeconomy: An Enterprise-Level Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-17, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:2:p:524-:d:1314742
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/2/524/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/2/524/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ricardo Pereira & Neri dos Santos, 2023. "Neoindustrialization—Reflections on a New Paradigmatic Approach for the Industry: A Scoping Review on Industry 5.0," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, July.
    2. Watanabe, Chihiro & Naveed, Nasir & Neittaanmäki, Pekka, 2019. "Digitalized bioeconomy: Planned obsolescence-driven circular economy enabled by Co-Evolutionary coupling," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 8-30.
    3. Felicitas Hoppe & Nadine Gatzert & Petra Gruner, 2021. "Cyber risk management in SMEs: insights from industry surveys," Journal of Risk Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(3/4), pages 240-260, July.
    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. Daniela Firoiu & George H. Ionescu & Teodor Marian Cojocaru & Mariana Niculescu & Maria Nache Cimpoeru & Oana Alexandra Călin, 2023. "Progress of EU Member States Regarding the Bioeconomy and Biomass Producing and Converting Sectors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Chien, Fengsheng & Anwar, Ahsan & Hsu, Ching-Chi & Sharif, Arshian & Razzaq, Asif & Sinha, Avik, 2021. "The role of information and communication technology in encountering environmental degradation: Proposing an SDG framework for the BRICS countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Tou, Yuji & Watanabe, Chihiro & Moriya, Kuniko & Neittaanmäki, Pekka, 2019. "Harnessing soft innovation resources leads to neo open innovation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    5. Saraji, Mahyar Kamali & Streimikiene, Dalia, 2022. "Evaluating the circular supply chain adoption in manufacturing sectors: A picture fuzzy approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Kimata, Akira & Itakura, Hiroaki, 2021. "Interactions between organizational culture, capability, and performance in the technological aspect of society: Empirical research into the Japanese service industry," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    7. Tou, Yuji & Watanabe, Chihiro & Moriya, Kuniko & Naveed, Nasir & Vurpillat, Victor & Neittaanmäki, Pekka, 2019. "The transformation of R&D into neo open innovation- a new concept in R&D endeavor triggered by amazon," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    8. Mirza, Nawazish & Afzal, Ayesha & Umar, Muhammad & Skare, Marinko, 2023. "The impact of green lending on banking performance: Evidence from SME credit portfolios in the BRIC," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 843-850.
    9. Montserrat Jiménez-Partearroyo & Ana Medina-López & David Juárez-Varón, 2024. "Towards industry 5.0: evolving the product-process matrix in the new paradigm," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1496-1531, August.
    10. G. Venkatesh, 2022. "Circular Bio-economy—Paradigm for the Future: Systematic Review of Scientific Journal Publications from 2015 to 2021," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 231-279, March.
    11. Mellal, Mohamed Arezki, 2020. "Obsolescence – A review of the literature," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    12. Khan, Khalid & Su, Chi Wei & Rehman, Ashfaq U. & Ullah, Rahman, 2022. "Is technological innovation a driver of renewable energy?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    13. Jessica Rossi & Augusto Bianchini & Patricia Guarnieri, 2020. "Circular Economy Model Enhanced by Intelligent Assets from Industry 4.0: The Proposition of an Innovative Tool to Analyze Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, September.
    14. Zhen Liu & Jing Liu & Mohamed Osmani, 2021. "Integration of Digital Economy and Circular Economy: Current Status and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-27, 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:16:y:2024:i:2:p:524-:d:1314742. 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.