In the face of energy security and climate change, and with technological advances, many industrial countries have embraced the transition to a bioeconomy – an economy based on energy, chemicals and materials obtained from biomass. However, the policy and academic discourses on a bioeconomy transition suggest growing controversy around its social, environmental and ethical impacts. In this article, we apply an epistemic forms framework to better understand the scope and extent of the bioeconomy debate. We find that industry and governments take a narrow approach to a bioeconomy and tend to view it exclusively as a technical concept. We argue that the discursive and practical dimensions of the transition would shed light on the issues of what type of a bioeconomy to strive for, through which procedures and with what impacts for diverse stakeholders. We conclude with a set of recommendations related to a bioeconomy transition.
Asveld L, van Est R and Stemerding D (2011) Getting to the core of the bioeconomy: A perspective on the sustainable promise of biomass. Report, The Rathenau Institute.
3.
Bang J, Follér A and Buttazzoni M (2009) Industrial biotechnology: More than green fuel in a dirty economy? Exploring the transformational potential of industrial biotechnology on the way to a green economy. Report, Worldwide Fund for Nature report. Available at: http://www.bio-economy.net/reports/files/wwf_biotech.pdf (accessed 11 December 2015).
4.
Bastos Lima M (2012) An institutional analysis of biofuel policies and their social implications in developing countries: Lessons from Brazil, India and Indonesia. Report for United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.
5.
BirchK (2006) The neoliberal underpinnings of the bioeconomy: The ideological discourses and practices of economic competitiveness. Genomics, Society and Policy2: 1–15.
6.
BirchK (2012) Knowledge, place, and power: Geographies of value in the bioeconomy. New Genetics and Society31: 183–201.
7.
BirchKTyfieldD (2012) Theorizing the bioeconomy: Biovalue, biocapital, bioeconomics or … what?Science, Technology, & Human Values8(3): 299–327.
8.
BrugnachMIngramH (2012) Ambiguity: The challenge of knowing and deciding together. Environmental Science and Policy15: 60–71.
9.
ButlerCDemskiCParkhillK (2015) Public values for energy futures: Framing, indeterminacy and policy making. Energy Policy. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.01.035.
10.
ConcaK (2006) Governing Water: Contentious Transnational Politics and Global Institution Building, Cambridge: MIT Press.
11.
CookNWagenaarH (2012) Navigating the eternally unfolding present: Toward an epistemology of practice. The American Review of Public Administration42: 3–38.
12.
CramersJKoendersB (2008) Biobrandstof: ja, maar alleen als het duurzaam is. de Volkskrant. 25 March.
13.
Danish Center for Strategic Research (2012) The Copenhagen declaration for a bioeconomy in action. Report.
14.
de BesiMMcCormickK (2015) Towards a bioeconomy in Europe: National, regional and industrial strategies. Sustainability7: 10461–10478.
15.
DeweyJ (1916) Democracy and Education, New York: Free Press, 1997.
16.
DewulfABrugnachMTermeerC (2013) Bridging knowledge frames and networks in climate and water governance. In: EdelenbosJBressersNScholtenP (eds) Water Governance as Connective Capacity, Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 229–247.
17.
DewulfATermeerCWerkmanR (2009) Transition management for sustainability: Towards a multiple theory approach. In: PoppeKJTermeerCSlingerlandM (eds) Transitions Towards Sustainable Agriculture and Food Chains in Peri-Urban Areas, Wageningen: Academic Publishers, pp. 25–51.
18.
Dawes S, Cresswell A and Pardo T (2009) From “need to know” to “need to share”: Tangled problems, information boundaries, and the building of public sector knowledge networks. Public Administration Review May/June.
19.
Directorate General Research (2006) FP7 Theme 2: Food, agriculture, fisheries and biotechnology, 2007 work programme. Report, European Commission.
20.
ETC Group (2010) The new biomassters: Synthetic biology and the new assault on the biodiversity and livelihoods. Available at: http://www.etcgroup.org/content/new-biomassters (accessed 02 June 2014).
21.
European Commission (2007) En Route to the Knowledge-Based Bioeconomy, Brussels: European CommissionReport, Cologne Paper.
22.
European Commission (2012a) Bioeconomy newsletter, February, MEMO/12/97. Report, European Commission.
23.
European Commission (2012b) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Innovating for sustainable growth: A bioeconomy for Europe. Report, European Commission.
24.
FeldmanMSKhademianAMIngramH (2006) Ways of knowing and inclusive management practices. Public Administration Review66: 89–99.
25.
FlyvbjergB (2001) Making Social Science Matter, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26.
ForesterJ (2012) Learning to improve practice: Lessons from practice stories and practitioners’ own discourse analyses (or why only the loons show up). Planning Theory & Practice13: 11–26.
27.
FreemanR (2007) Epistemological bricolage: How practitioners make sense of learning. Administration & Society39(4): 476–496.
28.
GamborgCTegnerHSandoeP (2014) Ethical and legal challenges in bioenergy governance: Coping with value disagreement and regulatory complexity. Energy Policy69: 326–333.
29.
GovenJPavoneV (2015) The bioeconomy as political project: A Polanyian analysis. Science, Technology and Human Values40(3): 302–337.
30.
GustonDH (2001) Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: An introduction. Science, Technology, & Human Values26: 399–408.
31.
Hees E, Wolter E, Foluke QW, et al. (2013) Succes en falen van regionale projecten in de Biobased Economy. Deel B: Achtergrondrapport. Report for Wageningen University.
32.
HessMAdamsD (2002) Knowing and skilling in contemporary public administration. Australian Journal of Public Administration61: 68–79.
33.
HuitemaDMeijerinkS (2009) Transitions in water management: Positioning this book. In: HuitemaDMeijerinkS (eds) Water Policy Entrepreneurs: A Research Companion to Water Transitions Around the Globe,3–23.
34.
IngramHRathgen-SmithST (1993) Public Policy for Democracy, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
35.
Ingram H and Endter-Wada J (2009) Frames and Ways of Knowing: Key Considerations for Policy Response to Climate Risk and Vulnerability. Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. Report, Berlin.
Kamal M (2013) Bioeconomy – Sustainable alternative to fossil-based economy? Bioeconomy Malaysia. Report.
38.
KempRLoorbachDRotmansJ (2007) Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution. The International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology14: 78–91.
39.
KernFSmithA (2008) Restructuring energy systems for sustainability? Energy transition policy in the Netherlands. Energy Policy36: 4093–4103.
40.
KeeganDKretschmerBElbersenB (2013) Cascading use: a systematic approach to biomass beyond the energy sector. Biofuels, Bioproduction and Biorefinery7: 193–206.
41.
Knox P, Marston, S (2013) Human Geography: Places and Regions in Global Context. Pearson, 80 pp.
42.
LakoffG (2002) Don’t Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate: The Essneitla Guide for Progressives, White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.
43.
LangeveldHSandersJMeeusenM (2010) The Biobased Economy: Biofuels, Materials and Chemicals in the Post-Oil Era, London, Washington: Earthscan.
44.
LejanoRIngramH (2009) Collaborative networks and new epistemic forms. Environmental Science & Policy12: 653–662.
45.
LejanoRShankarS (2013) The contextualist turn and schematics of institutional fit: Theory and a case study from Southern India. Policy Sciences46(1): 83–102.
46.
LejanoRLeongC (2012) A hermeneutic approach to explaining and understanding public controversies. Journal or Public Administration Research and Theory22(4): 793–814.
47.
Lejano R, Ingram H and Ingram M (2013) The power of narrative in environmental networks. Cambridge MA, MIT Press.
48.
LevidowLBirchKPapaioannouT (2012a) Divergent paradigms of European agro-food innovation: The knowledge-based bioeconomy (KBBE) as an R&D agenda. Science, Technology & Human Values. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 0162243912438143.
49.
Levidow L, Birch K and Papaioannou T (2012b) EU agri-innovation policy: Two contending visions of the bioeconomy. Critical Policy Studies 6: 40–65.
50.
LoorbachDRotmansJ (2005) Managing transitions for sustainable development. In: WiczorakAJOlshoornX (eds) Industrial Transformation – Disciplinary Approaches Towards Transformative Research, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 187–206.
51.
M’barekRPhilippidisGSutaC (2014) Observing and analysing the bioeconomy in the EU – Adapting data and tools to new questions and challenges. Bio-based and Applied Economics3: 83–90.
52.
McAffeeK (2003) Neoliberalism on the molecular scale. Economic and genetic reductionism in biotechnology battles. Geoforum34: 203–219.
53.
McCormickKKauttoN (2013) The bioeconomy in Europe: An overview. Sustainability5: 2589–2608.
54.
MehtaLVeldwischGJFrancoJ (2012) Introduction to the special issue: Water grabbing? Focus on the (re)appropriation of finite water resources. Water Alternatives5: 193–207.
55.
Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (LNV) (2007) Overheidsvisie op de bio-based economy in de energietransitie, Den Haag: Ministerie LNV.
56.
MukhtarovF (2008) Intellectual history and current status of integrated water resources management: A global perspective. In: Pahl-WostlCKabatPMoltgenL (eds) Adaptive and Integrated Water Management: Coping with Complexity and Uncertainty, Heidelberg: Springer Verlag and Heidelberg GmbH and Co. KG, pp. 167–187.
57.
MukhtarovFGerlakA (2014) Epistemic forms integrated water resources management: towards versatility of knowledge. Policy Sciences47: 101–120.
58.
MukhtarovFOsseweijerPPierceR (2014) Global governance of biofuels: A case for public–private governance?Bio-based and Applied Economics3(3): 285–294.
59.
NorgaardK (2011) Living in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday Life, Cambridge: MIT Press.
60.
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2011) Biofuels: Ethical Issues, London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Report.
61.
OstergardHMarkussenMMeeusenM (2010) Challenges for sustainable development. In: LangeveldHSandersJMeeusenM (eds) The Biobased Economy: Biofuels, Materials and Chemicals in the Post-oil Era, Bristol: Earthscan, pp. 33–49.
62.
PaulaLBirrerF (2006) Including public perspectives in industrial biotechnology and the biobased economy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics19: 253–267.
63.
PierceR (2012) The ethics of reframing: The case of the biofuels debate. In: BucchiMTrenchB (eds) Public communication of science and technology conference.
64.
PierceR (2013) Bridging current issues in science and society. Biotechnology Journal8: 875–877.
Platform Landbouw (2014) Succes en falen van regionale producten van agrarische ondernemers in de Biobased Economy. Deel A: Advies. Platform Landbouw, Innovatie & Samenleving: Platform Landbouw, Innovatie & Samenleving. Report.
67.
PfauSHaggensJDankbaarB (2014) Visions of sustainability in bioeconomy research. Sustainability6: 1222–1249.
68.
Public Research and Regulation Initiative (2014) The Public Research and Regulation Initiative. Available at: http://www.prri.net/category/news/ (accessed 5 May 2014).
69.
RajanK (2006) Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life, Durham: Duke University Press.
70.
The Rathenau Institute (2014) The Rathenau Institute. Available at: http://www.rathenau.nl/en.html (accessed 2 August 2014).
71.
RichardsonB (2012) From a fossil-fuel to a biobased economy: The politics of industrial biotechnology. Environment and Planning C30(2): 282–296.
72.
RoselandM (2005) Towards Sustainable Communities: Resources for Citizens and Their Governments, New Gabriola, BC: New Society Publishers.
73.
Roelofson A, Broerse J, de Cock Buning T, et al. (2010) Engaging with future technologies: how potential future users frame ecogenomics. Science and Public Policy 37(3): 167–179.
74.
SarewitzD (2004) How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environmental Science & Policy7: 385–403.
75.
ScarlatNDallemandJFMonforti-FerrarioF (2015) The role of biomass and bioenergy in a future bioeconomy: Policies and facts. Environmental Development15: 3–34.
76.
SchmidtOPadelSLevidowL (2012) The bioeconomy concept and knowledge base in a public goods and farmer perspective. Bio-based and Applied Economics1: 47–63.
77.
SchneiderAIngramH (2007) Ways of knowing: Implications for public policy. In: Annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, 29 August–2 September, Chicago.
78.
ScottJ (1998) Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
79.
SleenhoffSLandeweerdLOsseweijerP (2015) Bio-based society by including emotions. Ecological Economics116: 78–83.
80.
StaffasLGustavssonMMcCormickK (2013) Strategies and policies for the bioeconomy and bio-based economy: An analysis of official national approaches. Sustainability5: 2751–2769.
81.
TemplerRvan der WielenL (2011) Biorenewables, the bio-based economy and sustainability. Interface Focus1: 187–189.
82.
TenbenselT (2006) Policy knowledge for policy work. In: ColebatchH (eds) The Work of Policy: An International Survey, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, pp. 199–217.
ThielAMukhtarovFZikosD (2015) Crafting or designing? Science and politics for purposeful institutional change in social–ecological systems. Environmental Science & Policy53(Part B): 81–86.
85.
TickeyAPeckJ (2003) Making global rules: Globalization or neoliberalization? In: PeckJWai-Chung YeungH (eds) Remaking the Global Economy, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 163–181.
86.
van der Berg N, Hulshof M and van der Veen M (2013) My 2030s: Burgers over de biobased economy. Report, Tertium.
87.
WaltherO (1987) Against idealistic beliefs in the problem-solving capacities of integrated resource management. Environmental Management11: 439–446.
88.
WeberEKhademianA (2008) Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review2008: 334–349.
89.
YanowD (1996) How Does a Policy Mean? Interpreting Policy and Organizational Actions, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
90.
YanowD (2009) Ways of knowing: Passionate humility and reflexive practice in research and management. The American Review of Public Administration39(6): 579–601.
