[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/jhtiwp/149.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Setting up a bioeconomy monitoring: Resource base and sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Iost, Susanne
  • Geng, Natalia
  • Schweinle, Jörg
  • Banse, Martin
  • Brüning, Simone
  • Jochem, Dominik
  • Machmüller, Andrea
  • Weimar, Holger
Abstract
The transition of the current economic system from non-renewable and fossil-based towards a more sustainable system using renewable resources is a dedicated objective of the German National Bioeconomy Strategy. In order to provide sound information on the status of the bioeconomy, a monitoring concept that assesses the bio-based resources and sustainability effects associated with German bioeconomy was developed. The general monitoring approach includes a definition of the bioeconomy and its implementation in terms of material flows and economic sectors at a given point in time. Based on this, available data is collected and bio-based material flows and economic sectors are quantified. These quantifications are used in the following sustainability assessment of material flows and economic sectors. This procedure can be repeated, starting again with a definition of bioeconomy that may change over time according to changing policies, market development and public perceptions of bioeconomy. Thus, bioeconomy monitoring considers the dynamics of the bioeconomy transition concerning processes, products, available data and connected sustainability goals. Understanding and quantifying material flows provides the foundation for comprehending the processing of biomass along value chains and final biomass uses. They also provide information for sustainability assessment. For biomass from agriculture, forests and fisheries including aquaculture, relevant material flows are compiled. Material flow data is not available consistently but must be collected from a broad variety of sources. Consequently, inconsistencies regarding reference units and conversion factors arise that need to be addressed further in a future monitoring. Bio-based shares of economic sectors can be quantified using mostly official statistics, but also empirical data. Bio-based shares vary considerably between economic activities. The manufacture of food products, beverages and wooden products has the highest bio-based shares. Bioeconomy target sectors like chemicals, plastics and construction still have rather small bio-based shares. The suggested assessment of sustainability effects foresees two complimentary levels of evaluation: material flows and economic sectors. The latter quantifies total effects of bioeconomy in a country and relates them to the whole economy or parts of it. The presented indicators were selected based on the Sustainability Development Goal Framework, the German Sustainable Development Strategy and the availability of data. The selection of effects and indicators to be measured in a future monitoring is a crucial point of any quantification. With sustainability being a normative concept, societal perceptions of sustainability should be taken into consideration here. In that context, we suggest to follow the approach of LOFASA for indicator selection. Sustainability assessment of material flows is demonstrated on the example of softwood lumber material flow and its core product EPAL 1 pallet using a combination of material flow analysis and life cycle assessment. Major challenges for a future monitoring of the bioeconomy's resource base and sustainability are availability of detailed and aggregated data, identification of bio-based processes and products within the economic classifications, identification and quantification of interfaces between biomass types, selection of indicators for sustainability assessment and the inclusion of bio-based services.

Suggested Citation

  • Iost, Susanne & Geng, Natalia & Schweinle, Jörg & Banse, Martin & Brüning, Simone & Jochem, Dominik & Machmüller, Andrea & Weimar, Holger, 2020. "Setting up a bioeconomy monitoring: Resource base and sustainability," Thünen Working Papers 149, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:jhtiwp:149
    DOI: 10.3220/WP1593762669000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/224497/1/1728782074.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3220/WP1593762669000?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Bo P. Weidema & Jannick H. Schmidt, 2010. "Avoiding Allocation in Life Cycle Assessment Revisited," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 14(2), pages 192-195, March.
    3. Bo Weidema, 2014. "Has ISO 14040/44 Failed Its Role as a Standard for Life Cycle Assessment?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 324-326, May.
    4. Patricia Gurria & Tevecia Ronzon & Saulius Tamosiunas & Raul Lopez & Sara Garcia Condado & Jordi Guillen & Noemi Cazzaniga & Ragnar Jonsson & Manjola Banja & Gianluca Fiore & Andrea Camia & Robert M'B, 2017. "Biomass flows in the European Union: The Sankey biomass diagram - towards a cross-set integration of biomass," JRC Research Reports JRC106502, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Weimar, Holger, 2018. "Holzbilanzen 2015 bis 2017 für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland und Neuberechnung der Zeitreihe der Gesamtholzbilanz ab 1995," Thünen Working Paper 275878, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    6. Jörg Schweinle & Natalia Geng & Susanne Iost & Holger Weimar & Dominik Jochem, 2020. "Monitoring Sustainability Effects of the Bioeconomy: A Material Flow Based Approach Using the Example of Softwood Lumber and Its Core Product Epal 1 Pallet," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-27, March.
    7. Weimar, Holger, 2018. "Holzbilanzen 2015 bis 2017 für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland und Neuberechnung der Zeitreihe der Gesamtholzbilanz ab 1995," Thünen Working Papers 101, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    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. Viktoriya Sturm & Myrna van Leeuwen & Ana Gonzalez-Martinez & David Verhoog & Nicolas Hark & Niels de Beus, 2023. "Providing Insights into the Markets for Bio-Based Materials with BioMAT," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-25, 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. Iost, Susanne & Geng, Natalia & Schweinle, Jörg & Banse, Martin & Brüning, Simone & Jochem, Dominik & Machmüller, Andrea & Weimar, Holger, 2020. "Setting up a bioeconomy monitoring: Resource base and sustainability," Thünen Working Paper 305677, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    2. Jörg Schweinle & Natalia Geng & Susanne Iost & Holger Weimar & Dominik Jochem, 2020. "Monitoring Sustainability Effects of the Bioeconomy: A Material Flow Based Approach Using the Example of Softwood Lumber and Its Core Product Epal 1 Pallet," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-27, March.
    3. Christian Dierks & Tabea Hagedorn & Alessio Campitelli & Winfried Bulach & Vanessa Zeller, 2021. "Are LCA Studies on Bulk Mineral Waste Management Suitable for Decision Support? A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-27, April.
    4. Jochem, Dominik & Bösch, Matthias & Weimar, Holger & Dieter, Matthias, 2021. "National wood fiber balances for the pulp and paper sector: An approach to supplement international forest products statistics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    5. Krexner, T. & Bauer, A. & Gronauer, A. & Mikovits, C. & Schmidt, J. & Kral, I., 2024. "Environmental life cycle assessment of a stilted and vertical bifacial crop-based agrivoltaic multi land-use system and comparison with a mono land-use of agricultural land," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    6. Ruxandra Bejinaru & Cristian Valentin Hapenciuc & Iulian Condratov & Pavel Stanciu, 2018. "The University Role in Developing the Human Capital for a Sustainable Bioeconomy," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 20(49), pages 583-583, August.
    7. Iost, Susanne & Bösch, Matthias & Jochem, Dominik & Weimar, Holger, 2020. "Verflechtungen der Forst-, Holz- und Papierwirtschaft mit den kritischen Infrastrukturen in Deutschland (KRITIS)," Thünen Working Paper 307492, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    8. Nicolas Robert & Ragnar Jonsson & Rafał Chudy & Andrea Camia, 2020. "The EU Bioeconomy: Supporting an Employment Shift Downstream in the Wood-Based Value Chains?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-14, January.
    9. Brizga, Janis & Räty, Tarmo, 2024. "Production, consumption and trade-based forest land and resource footprints in the Nordic and Baltic countries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    10. Ju Han Yeon & Seung-hwan Jang, 2023. "The Relation between Bio-Industry Performance and Innovation Capacity—Focusing on the Korean Bio-Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-17, April.
    11. 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).
    12. Yazan, Devrim Murat & Mandras, Giovanni & Garau, Giorgio, 2017. "Environmental and economic sustainability of integrated production in bio-refineries: The thistle case in Sardinia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(PB), pages 349-360.
    13. Voicu-Teodor Muica & Alexandru Ozunu & Zoltàn Török, 2021. "Comparative Life Cycle Impact Assessment between the Productions of Zinc from Conventional Concentrates versus Waelz Oxides Obtained from Slags," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-17, January.
    14. 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.
    15. Matteo De Besi & Kes McCormick, 2015. "Towards a Bioeconomy in Europe: National, Regional and Industrial Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-18, August.
    16. Mónica Duque-Acevedo & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña & Natalia Yakovleva & Francisco Camacho-Ferre, 2020. "Analysis of the Circular Economic Production Models and Their Approach in Agriculture and Agricultural Waste Biomass Management," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-32, December.
    17. Xuezhou Wen & Daniel Quacoe & Dinah Quacoe & Kingsley Appiah & Bertha Ada Danso, 2019. "Analysis on Bioeconomy’s Contribution to GDP: Evidence from Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, January.
    18. 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.
    19. Filippo Caporale & Jimena Mateo-Martín & Muhammad Faizan Usman & Carsten Smith-Hall, 2020. "Plant-Based Sustainable Development—The Expansion and Anatomy of the Medicinal Plant Secondary Processing Sector in Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-20, July.
    20. Irene Mazzei & Ruth Saint & Alistair Kay & Francesco Pomponi, 2024. "Embodied carbon quantification of luminaires using life cycle assessment and CIBSE TM65 methodologies: A comparison case study," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(1), pages 59-73, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    bioeconomy; material flow; sustainability; monitoring; bio-based; assessment; Bioökonomie; Stofffluss; Nachhaltigkeit; biobasiert; Bewertung;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:jhtiwp:149. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vtigvde.html .

    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.