Skip to main content

Rosari Chifari |Fundació ENT

Over the recent years bioeconomy has taken a dominant role in EU policy documents to promote the green transition in primary production and rural areas calling for a transformation of sociotechnical systems. In the context of bioeconomy, such systems involve renewable biological resources that are essential for human livelihood and diverse stakeholders that are responsible for the transactions of those biological resources. The interaction between actors with different perspectives and priorities and the management of biological resources, which are often in competition for consumption or poorly managed, make the field of action of the circular bioeconomy more complex. In addition, in the EU, some important voices from the primary sector and the rural world are missing from the negotiating table for the introduction of innovative and sustainable bio-based products and processes. Despite strong optimism about the potential offered by new bioeconomy technologies, their opportunities for economic growth while tackling climate change[1], there is still a long way to go for bioeconomy towards the implementation of more circular and sustainable business models.

The question is, what are the power dynamics and who are the main stakeholders that influence the transition to a circular bio-based society? How do we plan a sustainable bioeconomy development beneficial for primary sector and boosting economic well-being in rural regions? To ensure that the bioeconomy is truly promoting employment, economic growth, and social inclusion in rural areas while preserving the sustainability of their eco-systems, primary producers need to be included in decision-making of bio-based value chains.

Primary producers in the agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and aquaculture sub-sectors have been identified as key stakeholders of the EU bioeconomies in rural areas. According to the EC, 55% of jobs in the 2015 European bioeconomy was in primary production, generating 26% of the total turnover of the sector[2]. Primary producers are not only biomass providers but also end-users of bio-based products and innovations, so their role in bioeconomy is both crucial and critical. In spite of their relevance, primary producers have a marginal position within circular bioeconomy development plans and policy frameworks of EU Member States[3]. Currently, the core of EU’s bioeconomy social network is mainly formed by government bodies, research institutions and bio-based industries.

To enhance the role of primary producers in bioeconomy, the EC has encouraged ‘the deployment of inclusive bioeconomies in rural areas’[4]. However, the implementation of circular practices and the valorisation of residual biomass into bio-based products is still limited, especially in rural regions. Primary producers encounter administrative, technical, policy, regulatory, social and language barriers to be involved in innovative circular bioeconomy value chains. Global conditions and local factors linked to geographic contexts can make it even more difficult to adopt successful and viable circular bio-based systems in rural contexts. Indeed, global challenges such as population growth, substantial increase in food demand, over-exploitation of fossil-based resources, and consequent climate change, put pressure on the primary sectors to increase productivity and efficiency in a sustainable manner. Primary producers have limited access to knowledge and technologies to achieve sustainable intensification and are often not aware of applicable circular practices to valorise their biogenic feedstocks. Insufficient dialogue and cooperation between relevant actors (primary producers, industry, research institutions, advisory services and regional stakeholders) has prevented the deployment of long-term, innovative, economically viable circular bio-based business models. Moreover, the insufficient access to financial support to invest in infrastructure, equipment, and technical capacities currently constitutes the main bottleneck hindering the implementation of bioeconomy projects[5].

Apart from the real challenges encountered by primary producers, there are perceived challenges. Part of the scientific community is concerned about bioeconomy development and its impact on rural areas[6]. Since bioeconomy markets are focused on growth and competition, bioeconomy has been accused of favouring industry and research actors excluding small primary producers. Bioeconomy policy measures must do more to dispel this since small primary producers, often overlooked in industrial development, are key stakeholders. Digitalization and industrialization in rural business, strongly pushed by the EU bioeconomy strategy2, are in part perceived as a threat by small primary producers who may fear losing their jobs and traditions. Moreover, the further transformation of the countryside due to the presence of biorefineries is not always perceived positively. So, for primary producers, it is difficult to see that real connection between bioeconomy, rural well-being and sustainable rural development as professed in the EU bioeconomy strategy2. This sceptical view of bioeconomy is certainly impacting its deployment especially in rural areas characterized by small-scale farms.

When planning and implementing a circular bioeconomy, the specificities for each primary sub-sector need to be analysed. Multi-actor approaches are necessary to point out the perspectives of primary producers and the conflicts and potential synergies with other main actors of the bio-based value chains. Active participative processes can help in creating debates among relevant stakeholders and generate fair sharing of benefits along those value chains. Primary producers should be involved in capacity building sessions to improve their knowledge by showcasing successful circular bioeconomy examples relevant to their local contexts. Once empowered, primary producers must be part of negotiation table to contribute to the creation of context-sensitive bio-based value chains valorising local biomass according to circularity and sustainability principles. The continued involvement of primary producers in such processes can help incorporate their needs, priorities, skills, knowledge, values and capabilities. If a bioeconomy business is economically, socially and environmentally beneficial for primary producers, that needs to be proved with ad-hoc multicriteria performance assessments. This approach can help primary producers in perceiving bioeconomy as an opportunity to create jobs and development in rural territories where biomass is produced.

Clear strategies including the potential effects of the bioeconomy transition in relation to poverty, inequality, public health and the direct effect on primary producers should be provided. Institutions and governance at regional and national level play a key role in preparing the field to shape the direction of bioeconomy development. Bioeconomy cannot be considered sustainable per se but, needs to set sustainability as a central target to contribute to sustainable development5. Policymakers committed to protecting rural areas and granting benefits to primary producers are called to configure stronger cross-sectoral policies including tax incentives, specific financing, and regulations to promote bio-based practices sustainable both from an environmental and local economic point of view.

[1] OECD 2023. Carbon Management: Bioeconomy and Beyond

[2] European Commission 2018. A sustainable Bioeconomy for Europe: strengthening the connection between economy, society and the environment. Updated Bioeconomy Strategy

[3] Park et al, 2022. What does an inclusive bioeconomy mean for primary producers? An analysis of European bioeconomy strategies. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2022.2094353

[4] EC, European Commission, 2021. Commission staff working document accompanying the document: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European economic and social committee and the Committee of the regions, A long-term Vision for the EU’s Rural Areas – Towards stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas by 2040, Brussels, COM (2021) 345 final.

[5] Hinderer et al., 2021. Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158232

[6] Ciervo M., 2022. From “Bioeconomy Strategy” to the “Long-term Vision” of European Commission: which sustainability for rural areas? https://doi.org/10.4000/11rcj